Bi 


GRAMMAR  AND  ITS  REASONS 


GRAMMAR  AND 
ITS    REASONS 


FOR  STUDENTS  AND 
TEACHERS  OF  THE 
ENGLISH  TONGUE 


By   MARY  HALL    LEONARD 

i» 

FORMERLY  TEACHER  OF  ENGLISH  IN  THE  BRIDGE- 
WATER  (MASS.)  NORMAL  SCHOOL  AND  IN  THE  WIN- 
THROP  NORMAL  COLLEGE  OF  SOUTH  CAROLINA 


NEW  YORK 
A.  S.   BARNES  &  COMPANY 

1909 


Copyright,  1907.  by 

A.  S.  BARNES  &  COMPANY 

All  rights  reserved 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  PAGE 

I. — Present-Day  English  Grammar         .         .       1 
II. — Historic  Growth  of  Grammar  ...       5 
III. — Grammar    in     America     and     Reactions 

Against  Formal  Grammar  .          .13 

IV. — Grammar  and  Logic       .         .         .         .20 

V. — Universal  and  Particular  Grammar        .     25 

VI. — Object  and  Method  of  Grammar      .         .     28 

VII.— The  Sentence  Unit        ....     32 

VIII.— Parts  of  Speech 37 

IX.— The  Verbal  Element  of  the  Sentence       .     43 

X. — Verb  Complements         .          .          .          .48 

XI. — The  Objective  Constructions    .          .          .52 

XII. — Subject  and  Predicate  Nouns         .          .     58 

XIII. — Inflections 62 

XIV. — Government  and  Agreement    .          .          .66 

XV. — Person 70 

XVI.— Number 73 

XVII.— Gender 78 

XVIII.— Case 85 

XIX. — The  Possessive  Case       .         .         .          .90 
XX. — Comparison  .          .          .          .          .97 

XXI.— Voice 101 

XXII. — Mood 107 

v 

239422 


CHAPTER  PAGE 

XXIII.— Tense 112 

XXIV.— Nouns  and  Noun  Relations     .         .         .118 

XXV.— Adjectives  122 

XXVI.— The  Articles 126 

XXVII.— The   Personal   Pronouns         .  .   130 

XXVIII.— The  Adjective  Pronouns         .          .          .138 

XXIX.— The  Numerals        ...  .143 

XXX.— The  Interrogatives          .          .  .146 

XXXL—  The  Relatives 148 

XXXII.— Verbs  and  their  Principal  Parts       .          .   154 
XXXIII. — The  Two  Conjugations  of  English  Verbs    .   158 

XXXIV.— Auxiliary  Verbs 164 

XXXV.— Verb  Phrases 167 

XXXVI.— The  Modal  Auxiliaries  .          .          .171 

XXXVII.— Shall  and  Will,  Should  and  Would   .          .   176 

XXXVIII.— The  Subjunctive  Mood  .  .   192 

XXXIX.— Participles     .  .  .199 

XL.— Infinitives 20:* 

XLI. — Verbal  Forms  in  ing  .  20S 

XLIL— Adverbs 213 

XLIIL— Prepositions  .  .          .          .219 

XLIV.— Conjunctions 224 

XLV.— Interjections  ...  .  2'JD 

XLVL— Sentences  and  Clauses  .         .         .  2:^5 

XLVIL— Phrases 2,39 

XLVIIL— Abridged  Clauses  .          .         .         .211 

XLIX.— Word  Order 216 

L.— Good  Usage 2r,i 

LI. — Idioms 25$ 

LII. — Impersonal  Verbs  and  Sentences   .          .  2r>2 
LIIL— Had  rather,  Had  better,  Had  as  lief    .  267 
vi 


CHAPTER  PAGE 

LIV. — Case  Shifting  of  Pronouns      ,         .   '  .  272 

LV. — Words  of  Peculiar  or  Varied  Uses     .  .  280 

LVI.-r-Intermediate  Grammatical  Constructions  286 

LVIL— The  " Split  Infinitive'1             .          .  .292 

LVIII. — Disputed  Points  in  Grammar     .          .  .296 

LIX. — Changes  in  the  Grammar  of  English  .  301 

LX. — Grammatical  Characteristics  of  English  .  314 

PART  SECOND 

I. — Relation  of  Grammar  to  Other  Kinds  of 

Language  Study              ....  321 
II. — Relations  of  the  Study  of  English  Gram- 
mar to  the  Study  of  Foreign  Grammars     .  325 
III. — Place  of  Grammar  in  the  School  Course     .  329 
IV. — Definitions  in  Grammar          .         .         .  333 
V. — Analysis  and  Parsing     ....  337 
VI. — Sentence  Diagrams  and  Other  Devices     .  343 
VII.— Some  Words  to  Teachers       .         .         .347 
VIII.— Some  Words  to  Writers          .         .         .351 
Bibliography 363 


vii 


The  lady  Gramer  in  all  humbly  wyse 
Dyd  me  receyve  into  her  goodly  schoole. 

From  Stephen  Hawes's  Allegory  (Time  of  Henry  VII) 
5th  chapter.    "How  Science  sent  him  first  to  Cramer/5 


FOREWORD 


A  wise  abstinence  as  well  as  a  wise  selection  is  essential 
to  success. — W.  D.  WHITNEY. 

This  is  not  a  text-book  of  English  grammar  in  the 
ordinary  sense.  It  has  no  set  lessons  or  exercises  to 
be  given  to  a  class  of  learners,  nor  does  it  attempt 
fully  to  cover  the  ground  of  grammatical  science. 
Such  omissions  as  those  of  the  rules  for  irregular 
plurals,  the  principal  parts  of  strong  verbs,  the  declen- 
sions of  the  personal  pronouns,  and  similar  grammatical 
details  have  been  freely  made.  All  of  these  are  easily 
accessible  in  the  common  school  text-books  of  grammar 
and  their  introduction  would  add  nothing  to  a  student's 
resources. 

This  is  a  series  of  essays,  dealing  with  the  more 
important  parts  of  English  grammar,  and  also  to  some 
extent  with  the  development  of  grammar  itself  as  a 
science,  and  with  the  grammatical  changes  that  have 
taken  place  in  English  since  the  invention  of  printing 
and  the  growth  of  modern  literature  gave  a  degree 
of  fixity  to  language  forms.  It  is  a  free  discussion  of 
the  present  day  status  of  English  grammar  and  of  the 
relations  of  this  science  to  other  forms  of  language  study. 
The  "ins  and  outs"  of  grammar,  those  related  ideas 
that  in  most  modern  text-books  are  made  the  subject 
of  fine-print  footnotes,  are  here  a  fundamental  part  of 

xi 


xii  Foreword 

the  text  itself.  The  aim  has  been  in  a  condensed  and 
readable  form  to  throw  light  from  various  sources 
upon  the  difficult  parts  of  this  very  technical  and 
somewhat  unpopular  subject,  and  also  to  show  some 
of  the  reasons  why  English  grammar  has  been  cast 
in  the  mould  in  which  we  find  it.  Some  comparisons 
of  the  grammar  of  English  with  that  of  other  languages 
are  also  included,  with  the  emphasis,  however,  laid 
always  upon  the  English  side. 

There  has  been  no  effort  to  adapt  the  book  to  the 
needs  of  very  elementary  students.  For  this  reason 
illustrations  have  been  somewhat  sparingly  used,  but 
it  is  thought  that  enough  are  included  to  make  these 
discussions  easily  intelligible  to  those  for  whom  they 
are  chiefly  intended. 

While  this  cannot  take  the  place  of  a  text-book  of 
grammar  for  lower  grade  schools,  it  is  believed  that 
it  will  fill  an  important  place  as  a  book  to  be  read  and 
studied,  not  only  by  teachers  of  grammar,  but  also  by 
students  in  colleges,  normal  schools,  high  schools,  and 
academies,  who  are  looking  forward  to  the  teaching 
of  English,  or  who  are  specially  interested  in  the 
study  of  the  English  tongue. 

Yet  the  English  language  belongs  to  all  who  speak, 
and  read  and  write  it.  Journalists  and  other  writers 
have  their  own  special  relations  to  the  matters  here 
discussed.  And  there  are  many  general  readers  whose 
training  and  trend  of  thinking  have  given  them  an 
interest  in  these  subjects.  To  all  of  these  classes  and 
to  the  many  foreign  students  of  English  who  have 


Foreword  xiii 

felt  the  need  of  some  compendium  of  English  grammar 
prepared  on  a  more  general  plan  than  that  of  the 
ordinary  text-books,  this  book  is  offered  in  the  belief 
that  it  will  fill  a  place  hitherto  unoccupied  as  an  aid 
to  the  comprehensive  study  of  the  English  language. 

The  book  had  its  immediate  beginning  in  a  series 
of  "Talks  on  Grammar,"  written  for  the  New  England 
Journal  of  Education.  Similar  articles,  contributed 
to  The  School  Journal  and  other  educational  papers, 
were  added,  and  thanks  are  due  to  all  these  periodicals 
for  permission  to  republish  these  in  book  form.  Yet 
none  of  these  chapters  are  in  their  original  shape. 
The  whole  was  afterwards  re-written,  and  much  new 
material  was  added  in  order  to  make  a  complete  and 
consistent  whole.  A  few  chapters  addressed  to  spec- 
ialists— as  teachers  of  grammar  and  writers — and  a 
bibliography  of  the  subject,  have  been  added,  and 
constitute  "Part  Second." 

In  the  preparation  of  these  chapters  many  text- 
books, both  ancient  and  modern,  have  been  consulted, 
and  quotations  from  some  of  these  grammars  have 
been  freely  used,  as  chapter  headings  or  in  the  text 
itself.  The  quotation  headings  do  not  always  agree 
fully  with  each  other  or  with  the  chapter  below.  They 
are  intended  not  always  to  present  the  author's  own 
view  of  the  subject,  but  to  serve  as  side  lights,  showing 
how  the  phases  of  grammar  have  been  variously 
treated  by  different  writers  and  in  different  ages.  The 
selection  of  these  significant  extracts  from  other  writings 
on  grammar  has  occupied  many  pleasant  hours,  and 


xiv  Foreword 

it  is  believed  that  the  introduction  of  this  feature  will 
add  greatly  to  the  value  of  the  book.  Many  other 
quotations  of  nearly  equal  interest  might  have  been  chosen, 
and  there  has  been  a  temptation  to  extend  this  element 
of  the  book  to  larger  limits.  But  some  restraint  seemed 
to  be  needful  here,  as  this  is  not  intended  as  a  "gram- 
mar of  grammars"  after  the  Goold  Brown  pattern, 
but  as  a  presentation  of  the  best  modern  thought  on 
the  subject  of  English  grammar. 

Some  of  the  quotations  used  are  the  gatherings  of 
a  teacher's  notebook  through  many  years  of  teaching, 
and  it  has  not  seemed  possible  in  every  instance  to 
trace  the  quotation  to  its  original  source.  Most  of 
them,  however,  have  been  freshly  selected  as  the  direct 
result  of  the  extensive  reading  required  by  the  prepa- 
ration of  this  book. 

The  author  wishes  to  acknowledge  many  kind  and 
helpful  suggestions  from  personal  friends  engaged 
in  normal  school,  college,  and  editorial  work,  who  have 
taken  an  interest  in  the  preparation  of  this  book. 
Special  thanks  are  given  to  Professor  E.  S.  Joynes,  of 
South  Carolina  College,  who  read  the  book  in  manu- 
script, giving  much  valuable  and  critical  help. 
Acknowledgments  are  also  due  to  Professors  F.  A. 
Blackburn  and  A.  H.  Tolman,  of  Chicago  University, 
for  material  included  in  certain  chapters.  Secretary 
G.  H.  Martin,  of  the  Massachusetts  Board  of  Educa- 
tion; Principals  A.  G.  and  A.  C.  Boyden,  and  the 
teachers  of  English  and  of  foreign  language  in  the 
Bridgewater  Normal  School;  Dr.  William  Hayes 


Foreword  xv 

Ward,  editor  of  the  New  York  Independent;  Miss 
Sarah  L.  Arnold,  Dean  of  Simmons  College,  and  other 
competent  critics  have  also  given  personal  attention 
and  helpful  comments  to  the  manuscript  of  this  book. 
Finally,  to  her  pupils  in  English  grammar,  whose 
thoughtful  questions  and  interest  in  the  subject  have 
stimulated  research,  the  thanks  of  the  author  are  due 
for  the  invaluable  aid  thus  given. 


GRAMMAR  AND  ITS  REASONS 


PRESENT-DAY  ENGLISH  GRAMMAR 

There  is  an  ever  increasing  class  of  persons,  so  heterodox 
as  to  advocate  that  English  which  hitherto  has  sat  with  ex- 
ceeding humility  in  the  lower  seats  of  the  synagogue  shall 
be  bidden  universally  to  come  up  higher. — WELSH. 

Some  superfluities  have  been  expunged,  some  mistakes 
have  been  rectified,  and  some  obstacles  have  been  removed. 
— GOOLD  BROWN. 

We  are  freeing  ourselves  from  the  tyranny  of  Latin  models 
and  are  substituting  a  grammar  which  deals  simply  with 
the  vital  facts  of  the  English  tongue. — CHUBB. 

In  offering  to  the  public  a  new  presentation  of  an 
old  subject,  one  faces  two  practical  questions:  Is  the 
subject  itself  of  vital  interest  to  the  present  age  ?  And 
does  the  new  treatment  really  add  anything  of  value 
to  the  older  writings  on  the  subject? 

The  first  question,  as  applied  to  English  grammar, 
would  be  answered  by  many  persons  in  the  negative. 
The  revelations  of  natural  science  are  giving  a  new 
interpretation  to  the  universe.  Philosophy,  theology, 
and  psychology  are  changing  their  points  of  view  and 
making  conquests  in  hitherto  unexplored  fields.  The 

1 


•»  fcr  and  Its  Reasons 

development  of  art  in  America  is  opening  new  vistas 
to  the  esthetic  imagination.  History  is  re-writing 
itself  upon  new  basic  principles,  and  social  science  is 
grappling  complex  problems  of  vital  importance  to  the 
practical  welfare  of  mankind.  How  then  can  such  an 
abstract  or  unpractical  subject  as  the  theories  of 
grammatical  relationships  gain  a  hearing  from  this 
busy  age? 

Furthermore,  is  there  anything  new  to  be  said  on 
the  old  and  hackneyed  subject  ?  When  Goold  Brown's 
Grammar  of  Grammars  was  published  at  the  middle  of 
the  nineteenth  century  it  seemed  as  if  all  that  had 
ever  been  thought  or  that  could  be  thought  regarding 
English  grammar  had  been  gathered  into  that  volumi- 
nous compilation.  But  of  making  many  grammar 
books  there  has  been  no  end  in  the  years  that  have 
passed  since  then. 

Yet  in  spite  of  all  this,  we  venture  to  think  that 
English  grammar  has  not  been  worn  threadbare; 
that  it  has  a  sort  of  perennial  value  to  an  important, 
even  if  limited,  class  of  the  world's  thinkers,  and  that 
with  all  the  other  sciences,  it  has  its  new  message 
for  the  new  age. 

In  the  famous  "  Report  of  the  Committee  of  Fifteen 
on  the  Correlation  of  Studies  in  Elementary  Schools/1 
published  in  1895  by  the  National  Educational  Asso- 
ciation, Dr.  W.  T.  Harris,  the  author  of  the  report, 
uses  these  words:  "Grammar  is  the  science  of  lan- 
guage, and  as  the  first  of  the  seven  liberal  arts,  it  has 
long  held  sway  in  school  as  the  disciplinary  study  par 


Present  Day  English  Grammar  3 

excellence.  A  survey  of  its  educational  value,  sub- 
jective and  objective,  usually  produces  the  conviction 
that  it  is  to  retain  the  first  place  in  the  future.  Its 
chief  objective  advantage  is  that  it  shows  the  structure 
of  language  and  the  logical  forms  of  subject,  predicate, 
and  modifier,  thus  revealing  the  essential  nature  of 
thought  itself,  the  most  important  of  all  objects  because 
it  is  self -object." 

Yet  with  this  high  estimate  of  the  value  of  grammar 
comes  the  word  of  limitation  and  of  caution.  The 
same  report  well  says:  "No  formal  labor  on  a  great 
objective  field  is  ever  wholly  lost,  .  .  .  but  it  is 
easy  for  any  special  formal  discipline  when  continued 
too  long,  to  paralyze  or  arrest  growth  at  that  stage. 
.  .  .  Grammar,  rich  as  it  is  in  its  contents,  is  only 
a  formal  discipline  as  respects  the  scientific,  historic, 
or  literary  contents  of  language,  and  is  indifferent  to 
them.  A  training  for  four  or  five  years  in  parsing 
and  grammatical  analysis,  practised  on  literary  works 
of  art  (Milton,  Shakespeare,  Tennyson,  Scott),  is  a 
training  of  the  pupil  into  habits  of  indifference  toward, 
and  neglect  of,  the  genius  employed  in  the  literary 
work  of  art.  .  .  .  Your  Committee  is  unanimous 
in  the  conviction  that  formal  grammar  should  not  be 
allowed  to  usurp  the  place  of  a  study  of  the  literary 
work  of  art  in  accordance  with  literary  method." 

Grammar  has  other  deficiencies  as  a  language  study 
which  literature  alone  cannot  supply.  The  habit  of 
mind  which  grammar  induces  is  critical  and  this 
always  impedes  fluency  of  expression.  Although  gram- 


4  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

mar  is  one  of  the  important  aids  to  composition,  yet 
in  the  act  of  speaking  or  writing,  grammar  itself  and  its 
hampering  rules  should  be  forgotten,  while  the  mind 
gives  itself  up  to  the  spontaneous  expression  of  its 
own  thought.  Grammar  is  able  to  achieve  its  own 
ends  perfectly  only  when  it  is  pursued  side  by  side 
with  literary  study  and  practical  composition,  each  of 
the  three  aiding  and  supplementing  the  other  two 
in  the  united  effort  to  produce  genuine  language  power. 

But  after  all  its  limitations  have  been  conceded, 
and  the  claims  of  other  branches  of  knowledge  pro- 
vided for,  there  still  remains  a  clear  field  of  perpetual 
human  interest  in  the  subjects  that  grammar  deals  with. 

In  this  territory  new  mines  of  great  depth  and 
richness  have  been  opened  during  recent  years.  Com- 
parative and  historical  grammar  has  added  much  to 
the  older  material.  The  English  language  has  been 
gaining  in  powers  of  expression,  and  in  prestige  among 
the  languages  of  the  world.  In  this  process  it  has 
cast  off  some  old  restraints  and  has  added  new  logical 
relationships,  which  require  grammatical  interpretation. 
Much  interesting  material  has  been  brought  forward 
by  writers  on  grammar  within  a  generation,  and  this 
needs  to  be  sifted  and  classified,  and  to  find  clear  and 
permanent  expression  for  the  general  public. 

And  so  it  does  not  seem  an  ignoble  or  valueless  task 
to  bring  together  these  newer  thoughts  that  have 
presented  themselves  to  thinkers,  and  to  set  forth  in 
a  new  book  in  these  early  years  of  the  twentieth 
century,  the  status  of  Present-Day  English  Grammar. 


II 

HISTORIC  GROWTH  OF  GRAMMAR 

In  science,  a  phenomenon  is  explained  by  its  antecedent 
phenomena.  A  tree  is  explained,  not  by  its  full-leaved 
glory,  but  by  the  states  and  forms  through  which  it  has  suc- 
cessively advanced. — WELSH. 

Under  the  light  that  has  come  from  the  advance  in  Eng- 
lish philology  the  old  notion  that  the  best  approach  to  Eng- 
lish grammar  is  through  the  Latin  grammar,  has  vanished 
forever. — ALLEN. 

The  real  history  of  grammar  is  little  known,  because  the 
story  of  the  systems  most  generally  received  has  never  been 
fully  told. — GOOLD  BROWN. 

{  Grammarians    are    the   guardians,    not    the    authors,    of 
language. — TRANSLATED  FROM  SENECA/ 

The  history  of  a  science  often  shows  peculiar  phases, 
but  perhaps  none  has  had  more  marked  mutations 
than  have  been  felt  by  English  grammar.  The  form 
which  the  science  has  taken  bears  curious  marks  of 
the  history  through  which  it  has  passed,  and  the 
present  grammar  ideals  are  to  be  interpreted  in  part 
by  the  early  history. 

In  tracing  these  changes  one  needs  to  bear  in  mind 
the  important  distinction  between  Universal  or  General 
grammar,  and  the  particular  grammar  of  an  individual 
tongue.  Long  before  the  specific  grammar  of  English 
was  thought  of,  the  principles  of  general  grammar 

5 


6  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

were  wrought  out  through  the  Greek  and  Latin  lan- 
guages and  were  applied  to  English  by  the  classical 
scholars  of  England.  The  history  of  English  grammar 
cannot  be  given  without  tracing  this  earlier  develop- 
ment of  general  grammar. 

The  earliest  traces  of  grammatical  study  that  we  have 
anv  record  of,  come  from  Chaldea.  The  scholars  of 
f;hat  ancient  kingdom  compiled  dictionaries  to  aid 
themselves  in  learning  the  language  of  a  still  earlier 
people  who  occupied  the  same  territory.  Fragments 
of  these  ancient  writings  have  been  found  in  the  ruins 
of  the  royal  libraries  of  Sargon  and  Assurbanipal. 
This  purpose  of  acquiring  foreign  languages,  rather 
than  of  understanding  or  perfecting  the  use  of  one's 
own  tongue,  was  the  dominant  one  in  early  grammatical 
studies,  and  it  still  holds  as  an  important  reason  for 
the  study  of  grammar  to-day. 

It  was  among  the  Greeks  that  the  doctrine  of  the 
Parts  of  Speech  first  appeared.  Plato  began  it  by 
dividing  words  into  nouns  and  verbs,  but  without 
defining  either.  Aristotle,  for  rhetorical  purposes, 
added  conjunctions  and  articles,  but  by  the  latter  lie 
meant  chiefly  pronouns  or  relatives.  Protagoras, 
Aristophanes,  and  other  Grecian  writers  advanced 
certain  grammatical  ideas,  but  the  science  of  grammar 
did  not  advance  very  far  within  the  borders  of  ancient 
Greece  itself. 

The  critical  study  of  language  was  really  begun  by 
Greek  scholars  at  Alexandria  about  250  B.  C.  In 
this  city  about  10,000  students  were  gathered  from 


Historic  Growth  of  Grammar  7 

all  parts  of  the  world  to  make  use  of  the  famous  libraries 
where  all  languages  having  any  claim  to  literature 
were  represented.  Zenodotus,  the  first  librarian, 
pointed  out  personal  pronouns  as  a  class  of  words, 
also  the  singular,  dual,  and  plural  numbers  of  sub- 
stantives. About  a  hundred  years  B.  C.,  Aristarchus 
founded  in  Alexandria  a  celebrated  grammatical  and 
critical  school.  It  was  he  who  discussed  prepositions 
for  the  first  time,  and  the  Alexandrian  students  made 
other  contributions  to  the  growing  language  study. 

Later  it  became  fashionable  for  young  Roman  gentry 
to  learn  Greek.  About  29  B.  C.,  Dionysius,  who  had 
been  a  pupil  in  the  Alexandrian  School,  went  from 
Asia  Minor  to  Rome  as  professor  of  Greek,  and  the 
lectures  which  he  gave  there  were  finally  reduced  to 
book  form.  This  was  the  earliest  European  treatise 
on  grammar  and  it  is  still  extant. 

During  the  Gallic  War  Caesar  wrote  in  his  tent  a 
treatise  on  grammatical  matters,  and  invented  the 
term  "ablative  case."  In  the  first  century  A.  D., 
Quintilian  wrote  a  complete  system  of  rhetoric  in 
twelve  books,  in  which  verbs,  nouns,  and  adjectives 
are  recognized,  but  not  the  other  parts  of  speech. 
By  the  writings  of  Dionysius,  Quintilian,  and  their 
successors,  the  Latin  language  was  finally  pressed 
into  the  mould  of  Greek  grammar,  much  as  in  later 
ages  the  languages  of  modern  Europe  have  been 
interpreted  through  the  forms  of  Latin.  The  form  of 
grammar  as  taught  during  the  middle  ages  was  finally 
fixed  by  Priscian,  who  was  master  of  a  famous  school 


8  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

in  Constantinople,  and  who,  about  525  A.  D.,  wrote 
a  very  famous  book  on  grammar.  His  rigid  attention 
to  grammatical  correctness  gave  rise  to  the  phrase 
"breaking  Priscian's  head,"  which  was  applied  to  the 
violators  of  grammatical  rules.  By  thus  fixing  the 
form  of  grammar  for  the  Middle  Ages,  he  laid  the 
foundations  for  modern  grammar. 

The  first  manuals  of  grammar  used  in  England  were 
not  English  grammars  in  any  sense.  Most  of  them 
were  written  in  Latin.  Others  were  simply  translations 
of  the  Latin  "Accidence,"  written  to  aid  British  youth 
in  gaining  a  knowledge  of  the  Latin  tongue  without 
any  thought  of  accuracy  in  their  own. 

Of  the  early  Latin  grammars  that  were  in  use  in 
England  before  English  grammar  originated,  much 
might  be  said.  One  of  these,  called  the  Minerva  of 
Sanctius,  is  thus  described  by  Dr.  W.  T.  Harris: 

"This  Minerva  of  Sanctius  is  a  wonderful  collection 
of  deep  studies  on  Latin  declensions  and  conjugations, 
the  logical  basis  for  the  distinction  of  the  parts  of 
speech,  a  valuable  treatise  on  syntax.  When  one 
first  studies  Sanctius  he  is  amazed  to  find  how  much 
philosophy  of  grammar  has  really  been  forgotten  or 
has  never  found  its  way  into  English  grammar." 

The  idea  of  applying  grammar  to  English  does  not 
seem  to  have  dawned  until  the  time  of  the  Tudor 
kings.  Even  then  it  was  not  English  grammar  that 
was  directly  taught.  It  was  still  the  grammar  of 
Latin,  written  however  with  the  added  idea  that  all 
grammar  could  be  taught  through  the  medium  of  Latin. 


Historic  Growth  of  Grammar  9 

But  the  grammar  of  the  highly  inflected  Latin,  with 
its  large  syntax  dependent  on  inflection,  proved  to  be 
a  gigantic  mould  for  the  vigorous  English  which 
had  cast  off  most  of  the  old  Anglo-Saxon  inflections 
and  agreements,  thus  making  its  word  relations  mostly 
logical,  rather  than  dependent  on  grammatical  forms. 
It  is  little  wonder  that  the  later  history  of  English 
grammar  has  presented  many  phases  and  has  had 
curious  reactions,  both  in  its  aim  and  in  the  methods  by 
which  it  has  been  pursued. 

Most  famous  among  the  grammars  of  England 
during  this  Latin-English  period,  was  that  of  William 
Lily,  the  first  high  master  of  St.  Paul's  School.  Parts 
of  this  grammar  were  written  expressly  for  use  in  this 
school  and  so  gained  the  name  of  "Paul's  Accidence." 
Lily  died  of  the  plague  in  1522,  and  his  grammatical 
writings  were  not  published  in  collected  form  until 
twenty  years  later.  About  1543,  by  order  of  King 
Henry  the  Eighth,  Lily's  book  was  put  into  final 
shape  and  ordered  to  be  the  standard  book  on  gram- 
mar in  the  English  kingdom.  It  soon  became 
known  as  the  grammar  of  King  Henry  the  Eighth, 
though  Erasmus  and  other  scholars  took  part 
in  the  revised  work  and  John  Colet  wrote  for 
it  an  introduction  which  was  the  first  attempt 
to  write  a  formal  treatise  on  English  grammar.  The 
author  treated  English  as  in  all  respects  like  Latin  or 
Greek,  with  no  laws  of  its  own.  This  famous  grammar 
of  William  Lily  or  King  Henry  the  Eighth,  was  written 
in  English,  but  applied  directly  to  the  Latin  tongue, 


10  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

and  was  intended  as  a  general  work  on  the  science  of 
grammar.  It  named  eight  parts  of  speech,  though 
not  precisely  the  same  ones  that  are  recognized  to-day. 
For  two  hundred  years  Lily's  grammar  was  a  standard 
text-book  in  England. 

Another  interesting  ancient  grammar  was  Pals- 
greve's  remarkable  French  grammar,  composed  for 
the  use  of  the  Princess  Mary,  and  printed  in  1530. 
It  contained  a  French  Accidence  and  Syntax,  with 
idioms  and  vocabulary.  The  book  was  written  in 
English  and  it  illustrated  the  French  by  comparison 
with  English;  so  it  has  been  of  high  value  in  showing 
the  authorized  forms  of  English  of  that  date. 

Colet's  Introduction  to  Lily's  Latin  Grammar  is 
now  recognized  by  scholars  as  the  first  genuinely 
English  grammar.  Yet  this  honor  was  claimed  for 
that  of  William  Bullokar,  who  published  in  1586  A 
Bref  Grammar  for  English,  which  he  declared  was 
16  The  first  grammar  for  English  that  ever  waz  except 
my  grammar  at  large."  Of  the  "Grammar  at  large," 
no  trace  can  now  be  found.  After  this,  various  gram- 
mars of  English  were  prepared,  though  some  of  these 
were  still  written  in  Latin,  like  that  of  John  Wallis,  in 
the  time  of  William  and  Mary. 

Among  the  eighteenth  century  grammar  makers 
we  find  the  names  of  Sir  Richard  Steele  and  Dr.  Samuel 
Johnson.  In  Steele's  grammar,  which  was  published 
in  1712,  the  distinguished  author  tried  to  make  his 
subject  more  interesting  to  pupils  by  putting  many  of 
his  rules  and  principles  into  verse,  a  device  which  has 


Historic  Growth  of  Grammar  11 

been  adopted  by  many  later  writers  on  the  dry  subject 
of  grammar. 

Thus  Steele  wrote: 

Grammar  do's  all  the  arts  and  knowledge  teach 
According  to  the  Use  of  every  speech, 
How  we  our  Thoughts  most  justly  may  express 
In  Words  together  joined  in  Sentences. 

One  of  the  most  important  text-books  of  the  eight- 
eenth century  was  Dr.  Robert  Lowth's  Short  Intro- 
duction to  English  Grammar,  published  in  1763.  It 
had  a  wide  use  and  is  recognized  as  having  been  the 
chief  model  for  the  still  more  famous  Lindley  Murray's 
grammar  a  generation  later.  In  issuing  his  grammar 
near  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century,  Murray 
acknowledges  for  his  materials  books  by  Harris, 
Johnson,  Lowth,  Priestley,  Beattie,  Sheridan,  Walker, 
and  Coote.  Several  other  English  grammars  that  were 
issued  previous  to  Murray's  are  not  included  in  this  list. 

The  most  interesting  and  curious  of  eighteenth 
century  books  on  English  grammar  is  that  of  John 
Home  Tooke,  who  published  in  1786  his  famous 
Epea  Pteroenta,  or  Diversions  of  Purley,  in  which, 
under  the  form  of  dialogue,  he  advances  various 
ingenious  grammatical  theories;  such  as,  that  all  the 
little  connecting  words  (or  particles)  of  language  are 
relics  of  once  active  nouns  or  verbs.  Home  Tooke 
made  many  mistakes  and  was  a  most  imperfect  guide, 
yet  his  astute  discussions  are  still  read  with  some 
interest  by  students,  and  throw  considerable  light, 


12  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

not  so  much  on  the  facts  of  grammar,  as  on  the  varied 
history  through  which  the  science  has  passed. 

But    among    the    names    of    English    grammarians 

before  the  nineteenth  century,  there  is  none  that  can 

rank  in  point  of  popular  favor  and  influence  with  that 

of  Lindley  Murray.     He  was  a  Pennsylvanian  Quaker, 

who,  removing  to  England,  published  about  1790  the 

first  of  the  many  school-books  which  have  borne  his 

name.     The  multiplied  copies  of  these  books  are  said 

to  have  reached  a  sale   of  five   millions   or  more  in 

England  and  America. 

Murray's  grammar  was  professedly  a  compilation 
and  has  been  criticised  by  Goold  Brown  and  others 
as  not  being  a  work  of  original  scholarly  research.  But 
while  other  grammatical  treatises  may  have  been 
more  profound  and  original,  the  work  of  putting  into 
popular  form  the  approved  thought  of  the  age  on  a 
subject  of  universal  interest  is  not  one  to  be  treated 
with  light  appreciatiDn.  It  was  Lindley  Murray's 
grammar  more  than  any  other  influence,  perhaps,  that 
has  fixed  the  form  and  nomenclature  of  modern  English 
grammar. 

From  the  time  of  Ben  Jonson  until  a  few  years  ago 
the  text-books  in  grammar  included  five  stereotyped 
divisions:  Orthoepy,  Orthography,  Etymology,  Syn- 
tax, and  Prosody.  But  modern  thinking  has  con- 
siderably reduced  the  range  of  the  subject,  and  only 
a  part  of  Etymology  (dealing  with  grammatical  in- 
flections) and  Syntax,  are  now  usually  reckoned  as 
legitimate  parts  of  grammar. 


m 


GRAMMAR   IN  AMERICA   AND   REACTIONS 
AGAINST  FORMAL  GRAMMAR 

| 

The  varietie  of  teaching  is  divers  yet  and  always  will  be 
for  that  every  schole  maister  liketh  that  he  knoweth  and 
seeth  not  the  use  of  that  he  knoweth  not. — GRAMMAR  OP 
KING  HENRY  THE  EIGHTH. 

Two  generations  ago  the  watchwords  of  the  parties  into 
which  the  educational  world  was  divided  were  "Grammar 
thorough  and  systematic,"  and  "No  teaching  of  grammar  in 
the  schools." — F.  H.  DALE. 

It  is  only  too  easy  to  overdo  the  teaching  of  formal  gram- 
mar.— LEWIS. 

The  uselessness  of  "make-believe  grammar"  was  respon- 
sible for  a  marked  reaction  against  all  formal  teaching  of 
English  grammar,  which  was  very  noticeable  for  a  time. — 
A.  H.  TOLMAN. 

Sir,  the  English  language  has  no  grammar  at  all. — 
DR.  JOHNSON. 

The  well-known  facts  brought  out  by  R.  G.  White  and 
others  do  not  show  that  English  is  a  grammarless  tongue; 
but  only,  so  to  speak,  a  concordless  tongue.  The  objection 
holds  good  against  the  old  conception  of  grammar,  but  has 
no  weight  against  the  modern  conception  of  grammar. — 
CARPENTER,  BAKER_,  AND  SCOTT. 

Near  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century  an  impulse 
to  grammatical  activity  began  to  show  itself  in  America 
as  well  as  in  England.  In  some  old  libraries  may  be 

13 


14  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

found  an  interesting  little  book  in  board  covers  called 
A  Grammatical  Institute  of  the  English  Language, 
by  Noah  Webster,  Jun.,  printed  at  Boston  in  1790. 
This  was  one  of  a  series  of  three  school-books  by 
Webster,  of  which  the  famous  blue-backed  speller 
was  one.  In  his  Grammatical  Institute,  the  author 
modestly  says,  "I  have  attempted  to  simplify  a  very 
complex  subject  and  shall  always  feel  indebted  to  the 
man  who  shall  suggest  any  improvement." 

Noah  Webster  had  a  unique  place  as  a  grammarian. 
lie  was  very  learned,  but  an  iconoclast,  and  somewhat 
changeable  in  his  views.  In  one  of  his  books  he 
names  eight  parts  of  speech,  but  in  another  he  follows 
the  lead  of  Lowth  and  others,  and  recognizes  only  six. 
His  grammatical  writings  would  perhaps  have  had  a 
larger  influence  but  for  the  overpowering  circulation 
of  Murray's  grammar  that  appeared  very  soon  after- 
wards in  England  and  was  for  half  a  century  a  standard 
text-book  in  Great  Britain  and  America. 

In  1799  Caleb  Bingham  (the  author  of  two  other 
ancient  school-books,  The  American  Preceptor, 
and  The  Columbian  Orator,)  issued  the  first  edition 
of  The  Young  Lady's  Accidence,  which  was  "De- 
signed principally  for  the  use  of  young  learners,  more 
especially  of  the  Fair  Sex,  though  proper  for  the  other. " 
It  had  upon  its  title  page  the  familiar  couplet: 

Delightful  task!    to  rear  the  tender  thought, 
To  teach  the  young  idea  how  to  shoot. 

This  was  the  first  English  grammar  used  in  the  Boston 


Grammar  in  America  15 

public  schools,  though  this,  as  well  as  Webster's 
Grammatical  Institute,  was  soon  superseded  by  Mur- 
ray's grammar. 

But  as  interest  in  the  subject  increased,  other  gram- 
mars were  published  in  America,  following  more  or 
less  closely  Murray's  plan,  until  the  work  of  elaboration 
culminated,  about  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury, in  that  great  thesaurus  of  rules  and  exceptions, 
Goold  Brown's  Grammar  of  Grammars,  a  closely 
printed  volume  of  more  than  a  thousand  pages.  This 
phenomenal  book  for  a  long  time  went  begging  for  a 
publisher  who  would  dare  to  undertake  such  a  pub- 
lication. But  at  last  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts 
became  its  patron.  The  book  was  printed  and  a  copy 
given  to  each  of  the  members  of  the  Legislature. 

Busy  people  of  to-day  have  little  use  for  this  great 
grammar  of  grammars,  but  the  book  remains  in  libraries 
as  a  monumental  piece  of  human  labor  and  a  standard 
encyclopedia  of  grammatical  information  up  to  the 
time  when  it  was  written. 

Meanwhile  the  methods  of  grammar  used  in  the 
schools  were  also  becoming  much  elaborated.  An 
important  step  in  the  history  of  grammar  method 
was  made  about  1823,  when  Kirkham's  grammar  was 
published,  containing  a  carefully  developed  "System- 
atic Order  of  Parsing."  Elaborate  parsing  models 
were  given  and  the  parsing  of  standard  literature 
became  an  important  school  exercise. 

In  1847  another  important  innovation  in  grammar 
method  was  caused  by  the  publication  of  Samuel  S. 


16  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Greene's  English  Analysis.  A  few  years  later  this 
book  was  extensively  used  in  grammar  classes  all  over 
the  country  and  had  added  to  the  older  parsing  practices 
some  elements  of  real  value. 

But  in  the  midst  of  all  this  development  of  the  science 
and  method  of  grammar,  for  many  years  during  the 
nineteenth  century  a  counter  movement  was  taking 
place.  A  strong  opposition  was  developed  to  English 
grammar  itself,  as  well  as  to  the  ideas  that  it  had 
become  burdened  with. 

The  fact  that  English  grammar  had  been  founded 
upon  the  forms  of  Latin  had  brought  into  the  text- 
books distinctions  which  did  not  really  exist  in  the 
language.  It  was  not  that  scholarly  men  really  be- 
lieved that  English  had  all  these  grammatical  dis- 
tinctions, but  it  was  still  felt  that  English  must  be 
interpreted  by  the  principles  that  had  been  wrought 
out  through  the  study  of  Latin. 

But  during  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
thoughtful  men  began  to  sift  the  Essentials  of  Eng- 
lish Grammar  from  the  heterogeneous  mass  which 
had  been  gathered.  In  1833  William  B.  Fowle,  a 
Boston  teacher,  put  forth  A  Rational  Grammar, 
declaring"  that  verbs  have  no  voice,  nor  mood,  and 
only  two  tenses, — with  many  other  radical  changes. 

Especially  after  so  large  a  showing  as  was  made  by 
Goold  Brown's  Grammar  of  Grammars,  it  was  not  to 
be  wondered  at  that  the  pendulum  should  swing 
rapidly  toward  the  other  extreme. 

It  began  to  be  whispered  in  various  quarters  that 


Grammar  in  America  17 

the  ends  for  which  grammar  had  been  pursued  were 
not  realized  by  this  means.  Grammar  had  not  suc- 
ceeded in  making  people  "speak  and  write  correctly." 

Another  idea  that  dawned  upon  educators  was  that 
the  scope  of  grammar  was  narrower  than  had  hitherto 
been  accorded  to  it.  Students  decided  that  Orthoepy, 
Orthography,  Prosody,  and  a  part  of  Etymology  itself 
were  not  really  a  part  of  grammar, — that  only  the 
inflections  of  words,  and  the  word  order  and  relations 
of  the  sentence  were  legitimately  to  be  included. 
Between  1860  and  1880  there  was  a  great  descent  in 
the  size  of  grammar  treatises  and  various  thin  booklets 
came  into  being,  each  claiming  to  contain  "all  that 
there  is  of  English  grammar." 

Yet,  when  that  bold  iconoclast  and  keen  verbal 
critic,  Richard  Grant  White,  published  Words  and 
Their  Uses,  with  its  chapter  on  "The  Grammarless 
Tongue,"  and  a  few  years  later,  Every  Day  Eng- 
lish, in  which  he  declared  that  "there  really  is  no 
such  thing  as  grammar  in  the  English  language,"  no 
little  buzzing  was  heard  in  the  hive  of  busy  grammarians. 

When  the  natural  opposition  to  such  ultra  sentiments 
had  somewhat  subsided,  the  effect  of  the  whole  mixed 
discussion  became  manifest  in  an  epidemic  of  books 
of  "Language  Lessons,"  books  large  and  small,  good, 
bad,  and  indifferent,  all  specially  recommended  for 
schools  as  ignoring  the  distinctions  of  technical  gram- 
mar. Towns  and  cities  began  to  question  the  advisa- 
bility of  having  any  formal  grammar  taught  in  their 
schools,  and  even  the  Connecticut  State  Board  of 


18  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Education  discontinued  the  State  examinations  in 
English  grammar,  giving  the  following  reasons:* 

"(1)  The  study  of  grammar  or  analysis  does  not 
help  us  either  to  speak  or  write  our  language.  (2)  As 
a  study,  technical  grammar  is  hateful  to  any  child  and 
belongs  to  an  advanced  course,  if  anywhere.  Its  use 
in  an  elementary  school  is  contrary  to  all  approved 
pedagogical  theories.  (3)  There  is  not  time  for  such 
work,  and  for  other  subjects  that  belong  to  our  civi- 
lization. (4)  We  are  convinced  that  the  discipline 
said  to  be  derived  from  the  study  of  grammar  can  be 
secured  by  the  study  of  other  subjects,  for  instance, 
natural  science,  which  of  itself  furnishes  practical 
knowledge." 

But  even  at  this  stage  of  the  history  there  were  not 
wanting  those  who  declared  that  "the  new  departure 
in  language  study  was  an  unfortunate  one,"  that  the 
text-book  makers  had  "gone  to  the  opposite  extreme, 
ruling  out  those  parts  of  English  grammar  which  are 
absolutely  indispensable  to  a  knowledge  of  our  lan- 
guage," and  that  "sentence-building  can  never  be  a 
substitute  for  solid  grammar."  The  writings  of  the 
late  Professor  Whitney,  a  few  years  ago,  marked  an 
important  advance  in  the  right  understanding  of  the 
place  and  value  of  scientific  grammar. 

The  tendency  of  recent  educational  thinking  has 
been  toward  the  strengthening  of  grammar  as  a  school 
study  as  well  as  toward  important  modifications  in 
the  way  the  subject  is  to  be  treated.  Within  a  few 
years  an  unparalleled  number  of  grammar  text-books 

*Cited  in  F.  A.  Harbour's  History  of   English  Gramme 
Teaching.     Educational  Review,  December,  1896, 


Grammar  in  America  19 

(or  of  series  of  language  lessons,  always  culminating  in 
a  course  of  scientific  grammar),  have  been  published, — 
of  differing  degrees  of  excellence,  yet  all  of  them 
showing  improvements  upon  the  grammars  of  the 
older  type.  Historical  grammar  and  comparative 
grammar  are  throwing  light  on  idiomatic  English  con- 
structions, and  students  and  teachers  are  recognizing 
the  value  of  English  grammar  as  a  disciplinary  study, 
and  also  as  an  aid  to  correctness  in  the  use  of  our  own 
language,  and  to  the  acquirement  of  foreign  tongues. 
The  status  of  English  grammar  in  the  schools, 
however,  is  still  somewhat  chaotic.  Yet  it  is  no  longer 
a  question  whether  grammar  shall  be  studied.  The 
questions  now  are  those  of  detail;  when  shall  it  be 
studied,  and  how,  and  what  ends  are  to  be  held  in  view 
in  the  study  of  grammar?  A  truer  recognition  of  the 
educational  value  and  also  of  the  limitations  of  gram- 
mar has  been  gained.  "Language  lessons"  have 
come  into  the  schools  to  stay,  and  their  value  is  unchal- 
lenged. Yet  grammar  will  not  again  be  displaced  in 
the  school  curriculum.  It  holds  a  central  position 
in  formal  language  study,  and  with  all  its  limitations 
it  is  able  in  its  own  way  to  give  elements  of  linguistic 
training  that  can  be  arrived  at  by  no  other  means. 


IV 

GRAMMAR  AND  LOGIC 

Grammar  is  the  logic  of  speech,  even  as  logic  is  the  gram- 
mar of  reason. — MAX  MULLER. 

Study  of  the  sentence  includes  study  of  the  thought,  a 
sort  of  unconscious  psychology,  the  more  unconscious  the 
better. — E.  S.  JOYNES. 

A  boy  who  is  intelligently  analyzing  language  is  analyzing 
the  processes  of  thought,  and  is  a  logician  without  knowing 
it. — S.  S.  LAURIE. 

Grammatical  analysis  cannot  be  committed  to  memory; 
it  is  a  direct  exercise  of  all  the  logical  faculties. — F.  A.  BAR- 
BOUR. 

While  these  two  sciences  mutually  illustrate  each  other 
a  clear  separation  between  them  would  probably  have  the 
effect  of  elevating  the  latter  (i.  e.,  grammar)  into  an  impor- 
tance not  hitherto  assigned  it. — THOMSON'S  OUTLINES  OF 
THE  LAWS  OF  THOUGHT. 

Certainly  while  logic  derives  such  help  from  grammar  the 
reverse  should  be  true  and  our  grammars  placed  upon  a 
direct  logical  footing. — C.  C.  EVERETT  IN  SCIENCE  OF 
THOUGHT. 

Consider  for  a  moment  what  grammar  is.  It  is  the  most 
elementary  part  of  logic.  It  is  the  beginning  of  the  analysis 
of  the  thinking  process.  The  principles  and  rules  of  gram- 
mar are  the  means  by  which  the  forms  of  language  are  made 
to  correspond  with  the  Universal  forms  of  thought. — JOHN 
STUART  MILL. 

20 


Grammar  and  Logic  21 

In  the  reactions  against  grammar  during  the  last 
century  it  was  sometimes  said  that  the  analytical 
study  of  sentences,  except  to  a  very  limited  degree, 
is  not  really  grammar  at  all.  Grammar  relates  to  the 
inflectional  forms  of  words  and  the  agreement  of  these 
forms.  But  modern  English  has  lost  most  of  these 
inflectional  forms,  thus  becoming  "a  logical  rather 
than  a  grammatical  language."  Hence  the  analysis 
of  English  sentences  and  most  of  what  is  known  as 
parsing,  was  said  to  be  an  exercise  in  logic  rather  than 
in  true  grammar. 

This  is  a  question  of  terms  and  their  definition. 
Modern  linguists  and  logicians  would  by  no  means 
restrict  the  term  grammar  so  as  to  exclude  the  study 
of  word  relations,  even  when  these  dre  not  definitely 
pointed  out  by  inflections  and  agreements.  Much  of 
English  grammar  is  really  included  in  the  domain  of 
logic.  From  the  modern  point  of  view  grammar 
includes  all  the  analytical  study  that  is  needed  to  make 
plain  the  structure  of  the  English  sentence,  including 
its  logical  relationships  as  well  as  the  grammatical 
forms  of  words  and  the  government  and  agreements 
of  these  forms. 

Thought  controls  the  forms  of  language,  and  neither 
the  thought  nor  the  sentence  can  be  really  studied 
except  in  connection  with  each  other.  The  grammati- 
cal forms  that  are  still  retained  in  English  cannot  be 
understood  except  through  a  knowledge  of  the  logical 
relationships  of  the  sentence.  And  on  the  other  hand 
these  grammatical  forms,  even  though  few  in  number, 


22  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

are  material  aids  in  gaining  a  knowledge  of  the  logical 
relationships.  Yet  the  logical  relations  cannot  be 
fully  understood  if  studied  simply  in  connection  with 
these  small  remainders  of  grammatical  forms.  It 
needs  a  far  larger  analytic  study  of  sentences  to  enable 
the  student  to  deal  intelligently  with  the  abbreviated 
grammatical  facts  that  still  belong  to  the  English 
tongue.  John  Stuart  Mill  once  said  that  "a  system 
of  logic  must  be  based  on  a  sound  system  of  grammar." 
It  is  also  true  that  a  system  of  grammar  finds  its  neces- 
sary foundation  in  logic  and  cannot  be  studied  without 
entering  somewhat  freely  into  that  domain. 

But  while  the  field  of  thought  is  in  a  measure  com- 
mon, the  manner  of  approach  to  the  given  facts  is 
different.  In  the  study  of  logic,  as  well  as  in  the  act 
of  expression  itself,  the  form  is  approached  from  the 
thought  side.  But  in  the  analysis  of  sentences  the 
order  is  reversed  and  the  thought  is  approached  from 
the  form  side.  Grammar  looks  first  at  the  sentence 
and  passes  from  that  to  the  elements  of  the  thought 
expressed  by  it.  Logic  takes  first  the  thought  and 
then  decides  how  the  sentence  structure  is  made  to  fit 
this  thought. 

A  conspicuous  illustration  of  the  difference  between 
grammar  and  logic  in  dealing  with  the  same  set  of 
objective  facts,  comes  at  the  very  beginning  of  the  study 
of  grammar,  in  the  two  natural  views  that  may  be 
taken  of  the  sentence, — that  is,  the  two-part  and 
three-part  theories  of  sentence  construction.  Both 
ways  of  looking  at  the  sentence  need  to  come  before 


Grammar  and  Logic  23 

the  mind,  and  to  be  reconciled  if  the  student  of  either 
grammar  or  logic  is  not  to  be  thrown  into  mental 
confusion. 

But  while  the  study  of  logical  relationship  and 
grammatical  form  must  proceed  side  by  side,  each 
illustrating  and  aiding  the  other,  great  care  should  be 
taken  never  to  confound  the  two  points  of  view.  In 
the  treatment  of  Case,  for  instance,  a  grammatical 
writer  must  never  permit  a  confusion  to  arise  in  his 
own  thought  or  in  that  of  his  readers,  as  to  whether 
the  inflectional  form  or  the  logical  relationship  of  the 
substantive  is  the  point  on  which  the  mind  is  to  be 
centered.  So  closely  are  the  relations  of  thought 
and  of  its  expression  intermingled  that  it  is  a  matter 
of  no  small  difficulty,  sometimes,  to  avoid  confounding 
the  one  with  the  other.  That  they  have  often  been 
confounded  is  the  cause  of  many  of  the  disputes  that 
have  arisen  among  grammarians.  But  although  the 
logician  and  the  grammarian  have  different  ends  in 
view,  there  are  many  facts  which  they  must  deal  with 
in  common,  and  so  far  as  the  structure  of  language  is 
concerned  they  must  not  antagonize  each  other. 

More  than  a  hundred  years  ago  the  celebrated  Home 
Tooke  made  the  first  serious  and  avowed  effort  "to 
introduce  logic  into  grammar."  He  was  an  able  and 
ingenious  writer,  but  linguistic  thought  has  made 
large  advance  since  his  period,  and  there  is  little  of 
value  for  the  present  age  in  the  curious  Diversions 
of  Purley,  which  he  wrote.  Other  writers  have 
attempted  (though  in  different  literary  form)  to 


24  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

straighten  out  the  relations  of  logic  and  grammar, 
which  still  remain  somewhat  perplexing  and  difficult 
to  handle  consistently. 

The  best  result  of  the  study  of  grammar,  however, 
is  a  logical  habit  of  mind.  The  effort  to  analyze  a 
a  difficult  passage  leads  to  a  fuller  appreciation  of  its 
meaning,  and  this  in  turn  cultivates  accuracy  both  in 
one's  own  thought  and  in  its  final  expression.  Nor 
does  the  advantage  end  here.  Through  the  keen 
perception  of  clearness  of  construction  thus  gained, 
the  student  not  only  gains  a  mastery  over  his  native 
language,  but  he  finds  in  it  also  a  firm  basis  for  the 
right  understanding  and  rapid  acquirement  of  foreign 
tongues. 


UNIVERSAL  AND  PARTICULAR  GRAMMAR 

English  grammar  is  but  a  branch  of  the  general  science 
of  philology,  a  new  variety  or  species  sprung  up  from  the 
old  stock  long  ago  transplanted  from  the  soil  of  Greece  and 
Rome. — GOOLD  BROWN. 

Philology  in  its  larger  sense  includes  all  that  is  or  can  be 
meant  by  Grammar. — EARLE. 

Whatever  harmony  is  possible  between  English  grammar 
and  the  grammar  of  other  languages  should  be  sought  if 
the  value  of  grammatical  study  is  believed  to  lie  in  any 
degree  in  making  easier  for  the  student  the  approach  to 
other  languages. — DAVENPORT  AND  EMERSON. 

The  grammar  of  a  given  language  may  in  theory  be 
divided  into  two  parts,  one  treating  of  general  gram- 
mar, or  the  universal  principles  that  belong  to  the 
grammars  of  all  languages,  the  other  dealing  only  with 
the  particular  grammar  of  the  individual  language. 
But  while  the  idea  is  a  suggestive  one,  the  plan  has 
never  yet  been  carried  out  in  a  manner  that  seems 
entirely  satisfactory  for  class  use. 

The  original  idea  of  grammar  was  that  of  a  universal 
science  in  which  different  languages  shared  in  varying 
degrees.  We  have  seen  that  the  earliest  grammars 
issued  in  England  were  books  of  general  grammar, 
written  however  in  Latin  and  applied  directly  to  that 
language  as  being  the  one  that  best  exemplified  the 

25 


26  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

principles  of  grammar.  It  was  felt  that  English  had 
little  of  real  grammar  and  that  all  that  it  contains 
could  easily  be  learned  by  the  study  of  general  grammar 
through  the  medium  of  Latin.  Something  of  the  same 
idea  is  still  prevalent  in  schools  and  colleges  to-day. 

And  there  is  some  justification  for  this  thought. 
Every  one  must  agree  that  a  knowledge  of  Latin  gram- 
mar throws  great  illumination  upon  the  structural 
study  of  English.  Yet  there  are  not  many  modern 
educators  who  would  admit,  either  that  a  knowledge 
of  general  grammar  is  sufficient  for  one's  understand- 
ing of  English,  or  that  an  adequate  knowledge  of 
English  grammar  can  be  gained  through  the  medium 
of  Latin.  It  is  only  by  the  study  of  English  itself  that 
a  true  knowledge  of  English  can  be  acquired. 

A  certain  amount  of  distinction  between  the  universal 
and  the  particular,  however,  is  advisable  in  a  course 
in  grammar.  The  idea  of  case,  for  instance,  belongs 
to  general  grammar.  A  student  gains  this  idea  most 
fully  if  it  can  be  illustrated  by  examples  taken  from 
several  different  languages.  But  to  know  the  specific 
cases  belonging  to  a  given  language,  to  be  familiar 
with  all  the  words  having  case  properties,  to  under- 
stand all  the  sentence  relations  which  these  cases  can 
hold,  and  to  form  the  habit  of  using  them  correctly  in 
all  these  relations,  constitutes  a  much  larger  bulk  of 
grammatical  acquirement  than  the  mere  knowledge 
of  the  primary  case  idea.  So  many  are  the  details 
of  specific  grammar  that  cluster  around  each  universal 
idea,  that  even  in  English,  which  of  all  modern  Ian- 


Universal  and  Particular  Grammar  27 

guages  is  most  free  from  grammatical  fetters,  it  is  still 
true  that  "universal  grammar  constitutes  but  a  very 
small  part  of  the  particular  grammar  of  a  language." 
A  knowledge  of  English  grammar,  then,  implies 
some  knowledge  of  the  principles  of  universal  gram- 
mar, the  recognition  of  the  ways  in  which  these  prin- 
ciples are  applied  in  making  the  forms  of  English, 
and  also  a  recognition  of  all  the  departures  from 
general  grammar  that  have  gained  an  authorized  place 
in  either  spoken  or  written  English.  This  knowledge 
is  to  be  acquired  chiefly  by  the  student's  own  examina- 
tion of  the  current  language  and  literature  of  the  period 
in  which  he  lives.  Yet  historical  and  comparative 
methods  of  grammar  study  are  also  needed  to  secure 
that  knowledge  of  general  grammar  which  is  implied 
in  a  true  knowledge  of  English  grammar. 


rVi 

OBJECT  AND  METHOD  OF  GRAMMAR 

The  duty  of  the  grammarian  is  not  to  invent   or    create 

\  but  to  state  and  classify  the    facts    as  he  finds  them. — 

RAMSEY. 


The  lafws  and  principles  which  underlie  the  construction 
of  sentences  are  all  embodied  in  sentences,  and  the  student 
may  study  them  directly,  first-hand,  just  as  he  studies  the 
flower  in  botany,  or  the  rock  in  geology;  and  if  he  forgets 
the  rule  he  has  only  to  examine  a  few  sentences  and  restate 
it  for  himself. — WISELY'S  STUDIES  IN  THE  SCIENCE  OF  ENG- 
LISH GRAMMAR." 

Whereas  we  learn  a  foreign  language  through  and  by 
means  of  its  grammar  we  must  learn  and  discover  English 
grammar  through  and  by  means  of  the  language. — FITCH. 

Elementary  oral  correctness  and  an  elementary  sentence 
sense  should  be  the  first  objects  of  grammar  study. — LEWIS. 

The  aim  has  been  to  present  in  compact  and  orderly  sys- 
tem the  cardinal  facts  of  the  English  language — to  feed  the 
mind  as  well  as  to  train  it,  and  thus  give  to  the  study  of] 
English  no  inconsiderable  place  in  general  culture. — WELSH. 

Grammar  is  a  reflective  study  of  language,  for  a  variety 
of  purposes,  of  which  correctness  in  writing  is  only  one  and 
a  secondary  or  subordinate  one,  by  no  means  unimportant, 
but  best  attained  when  sought  indirectly. — WHITNEY. 

In  teaching  grammar  it  ought  not  to  be  the  teacher's 
object  to  enable  the  pupil  to  speak  English  but  to  under- 
stand it. — ABBOTT 

28 


Object  and  Method  of  Grammar  29 

Two  widely  different  views  of  the  object  of  grammar 
study  have  prevailed  among  educators.  Some  text- 
books affirm  definitely,  or  in  substance,  that  "the 
design  of  English  grammar  now  is,  and  always  has 
been,  to  teach  the  art  of  speaking  and  writing  the 
English  language  with  propriety,"  and  that  "Gram- 
mars should  be  guides  plain  and  direct  to  correct 
writing  and  speaking." 

That  grammar  will  give,  and  ought  to  give,  prin- 
ciples of  criticism  whose  application  will  conduce  to 
correct  writing  and  speaking,  no  one  will  deny.  Yet, 
as  an  offset  to  this  class  of  grammarians  who  pride 
themselves  on  making  grammar  "an  entirely  practical 
subject,"  there  are  others  who  maintain  that  a  still 
higher  purpose  in  grammar  is  the  gaining  of  reflective 
power,  and  that  mere  correctness  is  a  secondary  object. 
W.  D.  Whitney  once  wrote:  "Grammar  will  be 
ready,  by-and-by,  to  do  its  part  in  correcting  and 
polishing  our  usages,  but  only  in  its  own  time 
and  way.  We*  may  turn  it  at  once  into  an  apparatus 
for  discovering  and  eliminating  errors  of  speech — 
but  only  at  the  risk  of  sacrificing  more  legitimate 
objects.  The  real  aim  of  grammar  is  to  turn  the 
lights  of  intelligent  reflection  upon  the  instrumentality 
of  thought,  to  see  what  is  its  structure  in  word  and 
phrase,  to  look  at  the  familiar  facts  in  their  resemblances 
and  differences,  their  connections  and  relations; — and 
this  partly  for  its  own  sake,  partly  for  what  it  leads  to." 

These  opposing  views  of  the  aim  to  be  sought  in 
the  study  of  grammar,  are  the  cause  of  the  chief  differ- 


30  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

ences  in  the  methods  used.  Grammar  pursued  for 
the  second  and  higher  end  is  necessarily  an  analytical 
subject.  The  analytic  method  will  develop  some 
principles  that  will  conduce  indirectly  to  the  "art  of 
speaking  and  writing  cornectly,";  yet  it  is  now  univer- 
sally conceded  that  power  in  the  use  of  language  is 
gained  more  directly  by  constructive  methods  than  by 
the  analysis  of  language  forms.  Through  practice 
in  using  language  under  wise  direction  the  child 
comes  to  an  understanding  of  what  correct  English 
is,  and  gains  the  habit  of  using  it.  The  later  analytical 
study  will  indeed  give  him  more  sure  and  final  tests 
which  he  can  apply  to  his  language  and  so  confirm 
the  good  habits  which  he  has  acquired.  Yet  most  of 
his  knowledge  of  the  requirements  of  English  conies 
to  the  child  at  an  earlier  age,  and  in  other  ways  than 
through  the  study  of  formal  grammar. 

Nor  are  the  final  tests  of  correctness  best  gained  by 
making  them  the  direct  end  and  aim  of  the  grammatical 
study.  The  power  of  discriminating  criticism  is 
subtle  and  far-reaching,  and  demands  an  intimate 
knowledge  of  all  the  language  facts.  In  other  words, 
the  so-called  "practical  aim  of  grammar,"  that  is,  the 
discovering  and  eliminating  of  errors  in  speech,  can 
never  be  fully  attained  except  through  the  pursuit  of 
its  higher  end, — namely,  the  gaining  of  reflective  power. 

The  facts  of  language  with  which  grammar  deals 
should  be  acquired  by  the  same  inductive  methods 
that  are  used  in  all  modern  scientific  study.  The 
student  of  English  is  an  explorer  in  language  fields, 


Object  and  Method  oj  Grammar  31 

searching  out  language  facts  by  his  own  investigations, 
and  forming  his  own  conclusions. 

Dogmatism  is  one  of  the  most  serious  as  well  as 
most    frequent    faults    in    grammatical    treatises.     As 
r   has  been  well  said,  "The  grammarian  is  not  to  take 
\    the  position  of  one  who  lays  down  the  law  of  the  lan- 
guage, saying,  '  You  should  say  this  or  that,  or  you  vio- 
late a  rule  of  grammar/  but  rather  'You  see  that  we  (you 
and  I  and  all  who  speak  good  English)  say  thus  and  so/ 
Therefore  we  hold  this  as  a  principle  of  our  language/'* 
There  is  a  peculiarity  in  grammar  as  a  study  that 
needs  to  be  taken  full  account  of  in  the  method  pur- 
sued.    The  native  student  comes  to  the  study  having 
already  a  good  command  of  the  facts  with  which  he 
is  to  deal.     He  knows  the  forms  of  words  and  phrases 
and  can  in  general  tell  bad  English  from  good.     If  his 
environment  has  been  so  unfortunate  that  he  has  not 
the  power  of  doing  this,  the  analytical  parts  of  his 
language  work  should  not  be  omitted.     They  should 
be  fully  supplemented,  however,  by  a  large  amount  of 
constructive  work  as  well.     Yet  it  is  the  student  that 
can  already  "speak  and  write  correctly"  who  is  in  the 
best  position  to  get  the  highest  benefits  of  a  course  in 
f  grammar.     For  such  a  student  the  chief  object  to  be 
*  gained  is  a  clearer  and  more  exact  sense  of  the  relations 
Jot  thought.     Out  of  a  good  grammatical  drill  one  who 
is  seldom  or  never  guilty  of  a  grammatical  solecism 
may  gain  a  fine  culture  which  it  is  idle  to  depreciatev 
and   which  will   yield   rich   results   in   increasing  the 
perfections  of  thought  and  its  expression. 

*  Professor  Whitney,  in  Journal  of  Education. 


vn 

THE  SENTENCE  UNIT 

"First  the  whole,  afterward  the  parts." 

A  sentence  must  be  looked  upon  as  the  first  creation  of 
language. — HISTORY  OF  LANGUAGE,  BY  STRONG,  LOGE- 
MAN,  AND  WHEELER. 

The  thought  is  the  unit  in  thinking,  hence  the  sentence 
is  the  unit  in  speech. — BOYDEN. 

The  sentence  is  the  structural  unit  in  the  use  of  language. 
A  knowledge  of  its  elements  and  their  relation  one  to  another 
must  logically  precede  any  detailed  study  of  words  and  their 
forms. — S  o  UTH  WORTH. 

The  larger  elements  of  sentence-structure  are  the  founda- 
tions of  grammar,  and  these  must  be  familiar  before  the  pupil 
is  ready  for  the  study  of  separate  words. — BUEHLER. 

Psychologists  and  logicians  in  all  times  and  almost  with- 
out exception,  have  insisted  that  the  sentence  must  have 
three  parts  corresponding  to  the  three  elements  'of  the  judg- 
ment.— WISELY. 

One  would  naturally  expect  the  sentence  to  correspond 
as  to  number  of  parts  with  the  judgment  which  it  expresses; 
but  since  we  commonly  find  the  copula  and  attribute  com- 
bined in  one  symbol,  it  is  convenient  to  include  these  two 
offices  under  the  term  predicate,  and  so  to  divide  the  sen- 
tence into  two  parts  only. — IRENE  M.  MEAD,  IN  THE  ENG- 
LISH LANGUAGE  AND  ITS  GRAMMAR. 

The  distinction  of  the  noun  and  the  verb  as  the  two  essen- 
tial constituents  of  the  true  sentence,  the  one  naming  some- 

32 


The  Sentence  Unit  33 

thing,  the  other  asserting  something  about  it — this  was  the 
first  distinction  successfully  made  in  the  historical  develop- 
ment of  our  speech. — WHITNEY. 

The  study  of  the  grammar  of  a  foreign  language 
begins  naturally  with  the  study  of  words  and  their 
inflections.  So  also  the  older  treatises  on  English 
grammar  usually  begin  with  the  parts  of  speech. 
But  the  newer  views  of  the  purpose  of  the  study  of 
grammar  have  changed  the  point  of  beginning.  The 
very  name  ''parts  of  speech"  emphasizes  the  fact 
that  there  is  a  whole  of  speech  that  is  larger  than  the 
classes  of  words  to  be  studied. 

Speech  is  made  up  of  sentences,  and  words  con- 
sidered in  their  relation  to  sentences,  are  "parts  of 
speech."  The  essential  facts  of  the  sentence  as  a 
whole  and  of  the  parts  of  speech  which  compose  the 
sentence,  these  are  the  fundamental  elements  of 
grammar.  The  best  modern  grammarians  are  united 
in  the  view  that  some  knowledge  of  the  general  plan 
of  the  sentence  must  precede  any  attempt  to  deal  with 
words  on  a  grammatical  basis. 

The  sentence  is  the  expression  of  a  thought  and  is 
therefore  the  unit  of  connected  speech.  It  has  two 
parts,  a  subject  and  a  predicate.  The  subject  is  the 
part  of  a  sentence  which  represents  the  person  or 
thing  of  which  something  is  said.  The  predicate  is 
the  part  which  expresses  what  is  said  of  this  person  or 
thing.  The  subject  therefore  is  naturally  the  name 
of  a  person  or  thing,  or  will  contain  a  name  with 
other  modifying  words.  The  predicate  must  contain 


34  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

a  word  which  has  the  power  of  asserting  or  stating 
something.  The  verb,  therefore,  is  an  essential 
element  of  every  sentence.  The  introduction  of  the 
ideas  Sentence,  Subject  and  Predicate,  Noun  and 
Verb  at  the  beginning  of  grammatical  study  is  now 
considered  needful  by  the  best  grammarians. 

In  logic  a  sentence  is  also  called  a  proposition,  and 
the  thought  expressed  by  a  sentence  or  proposition 
is  shown  to  be  the  comparison  of  two  ideas,  whose 
agreement  or  non-agreement  is  expressed  by  a  connect- 
ing term  called  the  copula,  as 

The  apple is red. 

The  apple is  not red. 

A  sentence,  therefore,  has  logically  three  inherent 
elements,  the  subject,  copula,  and  predicate  term  or 
attribute.  There  is  much  difference  of  opinion  among 
scholars  whether  the  recognition  of  two  parts  in  the 
predicate — i.  e.,  the  copula  and  attribute, — is  needful 
in  grammar.  These  ideas  are  much  harder  to  grasp 
than  those  of  subject  and  predicate.  Students  of 
logic  have  usually  contended  that  the  copula  and 
predicate  term  must  be  recognized  in  every  sentence. 
Other  students,  looking  wholly  from  the  grammatical 
side,  and  seeing  how  few  are  the  cases  in  which  the 
copula  is  really  distinct  from  the  idea  to  be  predi- 
cated, have  declared  the  distinction  to  be  not  only 
needless  but  false,  and  have  spoken  slightingly  of  the 
"pretended  copula  of  the  sentence."  Thus  John 
Stuart  Mill  tells  us  that  "  It  is  of  the  utmost  importance 


The  Sentence  Unit  35 

that  there  should  be  no  under-estimation  in  our  con- 
ception of  the  nature  and  office  of  the  copula";  while 
other  writers  have  declared  with  equal  vehemence 
that  the  theory  of  two  parts  in  every  predicate  is  irra- 
tional and  untenable. 

Logic  and  grammar  cannot  really  be  antagonistic 
in  their  views  of  the  nature  of  the  sentence.  Yet  for 
the  grammatical  understanding  of  most  sentences  the 
attempt  to  separate  copula  from  attribute  is  not  essen- 
tial, and  for  young  students  it  may  even  be  objection- 
able. There  are  some  sentences,  however,  such  as 
"God  is  good,"  "Washington  was  made  President," 
which  cannot  be  grammatically  studied  without  recog- 
nizing the  distinct  offices  of  the  two  parts  of  the  predi- 
cate. Unless  the  true  view  of  this  class  of  sentences 
is  gained  early  in  the  course  in  grammar,  many  predi- 
cate constructions  will  fail  to  be  understood.  It  is 
perhaps  only  the  predicates  containing  copulative 
verbs  which  the  ordinary  grammar  student  needs  to 
consider  as  composed  of  copula  and  attribute.  Yet 
with  advanced  students  the  thought  should  be  carried 
farther. 

The  logical  idea  that  in  every  predicate,  whatever 
the  form,  there  is  always  an  idea  to  be  predicated,  and 
an  assertive  element  which  may  or  may  not  be  distinct 
from  the  former,  is  certainly  an  illuminative  one  and 
will  aid  in  the  interpretation  of  many  othei*wise  diffi- 
cult predicate  constructions. 

Although  the  general  plan  of  the  sentence  requires 
early  attention  in  grammar,  the  complete  study  of 


36  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

sentences,  including  the  clauses  and  phrases  which 
compose  them,  cannot  be  fully  undertaken  until  a 
knowledge  of  the  parts  of  speech  throws  light  upon 
the  sentence  relations  of  these  larger  component 
elements. 


VIII 

PARTS  OF  SPEECH 

"The  chief  result  of  grammar  ....  is  the  doctrine  of 
the  parts  of  speech." 

The  mind  proceeds  from  the  whole  to  its  parts  and  their 
relations.  This  is  the  logical  order;  that  is,  the  order  ac- 
cording to  the  laws  of  thought.  This  gives  scientific  knowl- 
edge.— BOYDEN. 

We  need  not  inquire  what  a  word  is,  but  we  must  ask 
what  it  does. — MEIKLEJOHN. 

The  defining  of  parts  of  speech  is  a  serious  office.  The 
whole  future  of  grammar  rests  upon  the  classifying  of  words 
according  to  their  function  in  the  sentence. — BAIN. 

To  be  a  noun  or  verb  or  adjective  is  a  function  which  a 
word  discharges  in  such  and  such  a  context,  and  not  a  char- 
acter innate  in  the  word  and  inseparable  from  it. — EARLE. 

A  firm  and  consistent  application  of  the  principle  that 
the  part  of  speech  is  determined  by  use  and  not  by  form, 
will  do  more  than  any  other  one  thing  to  simplify  English 
grammar. — HARPER  AND  BURGESS. 

The  classifying  of  words  as  parts  of  speech  is  largely  arti- 
ficial.— CARPENTER. 

The  fundamental  parts  of  speech  are  four  in  number 
—substantives,  predicatives,  modifiers,  and  connectives. — 
DAVENPORT  AND  EMERSON. 

Parts  of  speech  sometimes  shade  off  into  one  another  so 
subtly  that  we  can  no  more  distinguish  them  than  we  can 
distinguish  the  colors  of  the  rainbow. — SNODDY. 

37 


38  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Not  to  this  day  has  It  been  settled  what  sort  of  a  difference 
in  words  shall  entitle  them  to  a  separate  rank  as  parts  of 
speech.— HORNE  TOOKE. 

The  number  and  character  of  these  recogni/eil 
classes  of  words  have  varied  at  different  eras.  The 
earliest  Greek  grammarians  named  a  few  parts  of 
speech  which  attracted  emphatic  attention,  and  others 
were  added  later.  At  last  Dionysius  carried  "eight 
parts  of  speech"  from  Alexandria  to  Rome,  and  from 
that  day  to  this  the  mystic  number  eight  has  been 
perpetuated. 

Yet  the  claimants  to  a  place  in  the  list  have  varied. 
The  participle,  included  by  Dionysius,  was  afterwards 
added  to  the  verb.  The  Greeks,  wiser  than  we, 
omitted  the  interjection,  which  indeed  is  not  a  part 
of  speech,  but  a  "whole  speech,"  though  vague  and 
undeveloped.  The  infinitive  has  sometimes  been 
called  a  part  of  speech.  Pronouns  have  sometimes  been 
classed  with  nouns;  and  again  the  personal  pronouns 
have  been  treated  as  a  part  of  speech  distinct  from 
adjective  pronouns,  which  were  classed  with  adjectives 
or  articles.  Lily's  grammar  (known  as  the  grammar 
of  King  Henry  the  Eighth)  included  the  adjectives 
with  the  noun,  declaring  "In  speech  be  there  eight 
parts  following:  noun,  pronoun,  verb,  participle, 
declined;  adverb,  conjunction,  preposition,  inter- 
jection, undeclined."  This  was  also  the  platform  of 
some  of  the  old  Latin  grammarians,  though  others 
maintained  that  the  adjective  ought  not  to  be  called 
a  noun.  Numerals  have  sometimes  been  considered 


Parts  of  Speech  39 

one  part  of  speech.  The  articles  have  often  been  so 
treated.  Murray's  old  grammar  does  this,  thus 
giving  to  English  nine  parts  of  speech,  or  one  more 
than  belong  to  Latin,  which  has  no  article. 

Not  a  few  of  the  ancient  grammarians  divided  words 
into  three  classes,  which,  according  to  Vossius,  were 
nouns,  verbs,  and  particles.  This  view  also  found 
advocates  among  the  early  English  grammarians, 
who  seem  to  have  supposed  that  grammar  would  be 
rendered  easier  by  reducing  the  number  of  the  parts 
of  speech.  Murray's  reply  to  this  view,  however,  was 
as  follows:  "Every  word  in  the  language  must  be 
included  in  some  class  and  nothing  is  gained  by  making 
the  classes  larger  and  less  numerous.  In  all  the 
artificial  arrangements  of  science,  distinctions  are  to 
be  made  according  to  the  differences  in  things,  and  the 
simple  question  here  is  what  differences  among  words 
shall  be  at  first  regarded.  To  overlook  in  our  primary 
division  the  difference  between  a  verb  and  a  participle 
is  merely  to  reserve  for  a  sub-division  or  subsequent 
explanation  a  species  of  words  which  most  gram- 
marians have  recognized  as  a  distinct  sort."  Recent 
grammarians  have  pointed  out  that  whatever  be  the 
number  of  classes  recognized,  they  are  reducible  to 
four  main  types,  substantives,  verbs,  modifiers,  and 
connectives. 

The  diversity  which  has  prevailed  is  shown  by  a 
curious  dialogue  in  the  Diversions  of  Purley,  by 
John  Home  Tooke.  One  of  the  characters  is  made 
to  say,  "You  have  not  informed  me  how  many  parts 


40  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

of  speech  you  Intend  to  lay  down."  The  reply  is, 
"That  shall  be  as  you  please,  either  two  to  twenty 
or  more."  In  Noah  Webster's  grammar  of  1790,  he 
says  that  eight  is  the  best  number  of  parts  of  speech 
that  can  be  found.  Yet  in  another  of  his  grammars, 
he  reduces  the  number  to  six,  following  the  example  of 
Lowth  and  others,  who  class  adverbs,  prepositions, 
and  conjunctions  together  under  the  common  name 
of  abbreviations  or  particles.  Home  Tooke  tells  us, 
however,  that  "Particles  is  a  convenient  name  for  all 
the  little  words  that  we  do  not  exactly  understand." 

The  number  and  names  of  the  parts  of  speech  have 
at  last  crystallized  into  the  eight  that  our  grammars 
generally  recognize,  and  perhaps  this  list  is  as  con- 
venient as  can  be  made;  though  several  of  the  most 
distinctive  sub-classes,  such  as  participles,  infinitives, 
articles,  and  the  different  classes  of  pronouns,  need  to 
be  taught  early  in  the  grammar  course  and  with  nearly 
as  much  distinctness  as  the  fundamental  eight  classes. 

When  all  these  are  clearly  known,  and  the  student 
is  able  to  assign  each  word  of  a  sentence  to  its  proper 
part  of  speech,  the  stronghold  of  grammar  as  a  science 
may  be  said  to  have  been  conquered.  In  thus  assign- 
ing words  to  their  parts  of  speech  it  will  be  noticed 
that  the  nouns  and  verbs  of  a  language  are  practically 
numberless;  adjectives  and  adverbs  of  quality  are 
also  numerous,  and  their  number  is  often  increased 
by  new  word  formations;  but  articles,  pronouns  of 
various  classes,  auxiliary  verbs,  modal  adverbs,  prepo- 
sitions, and  conjunctions  are  limited  classes,  seldom 


Parts  of  Speech  41 

added  to  but  constantly  repeated  as  the  connective 
and  filling-in  material  of  all  sentences. 

The  basis  of  the  classification  of  parts  of  speech  is 
the  function  which  the  word  performs  in  the  structure 
of  the  sentence.  For  this  reason  there  can  be  no 
logical  definition  of  any  part  of  speech,  except  by 
giving  its  function.  The  old  definition  of  a  verb 
as  "a  word  which  means  to  be,  to  do,  or  to  suffer," 
ignored  wholly  this  functional  element.  In  teaching 
that  "a  noun  is  a  name,"  the  student  should  not  omit 
to  notice  the  fact  that  this  gives  to  the  noun  the  gram- 
matical quality  which  admits  of  its  being  the  subject 
term  of  a  sentence. 

But  the  quality  of  belonging  to  a  part  of  speech  in 
English  is  a  very  variable  one.     It  is  more  a  habit  of 
the  word  than  a  fixed  and  innate  quality.     In  a  highly 
inflected  language  like   Latin,  the  word  is  ticketed,  as 
it  were,  by  its  form  as  belonging  to  a  given  part  of 
speech.     In  the  newly  invented  language    Esperanto, 
the  part  of  speech  is  shown  by  the  termination  of  the 
word.     But  in  English  it  is  the  sense  of  the  sentence 
that  must  decide,  and  there  are  only  a  comparatively 
small  number  of  words  that  belong  always  to  the  same 
part  of   speech.     The  pronouns  are  the   most   habit- 
bound   among   our  words,   but  with   some   of   these 
there  is  variation. 

For  these  reasons  it  is  even  more  true  in  English 
than  in  some  other  languages  that  the  sentence  and  not 
the  word  must  be  regarded  as  the  primary  unit  of 
form  as  well  as  of  thought.  This  fact  receives  added 


42  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

emphasis  from  the  name  which  has  been  given  to  these 
grammatical  groups  of  words.  Standing  alone  a 
word  is  incomplete  and  its  meaning  is  uncertain.  It 
is  only  by  the  right  connection  of  the  " parts"  that 
we  can  get  the  whole,  which  we  call  "speech." 


IX 


THE  VERBAL  ELEMENT  OF  THE 
SENTENCE 

The  apparently  simple  question  "What  is  a  verb?"  has 
been  from  of  old  the  subject  of  the  most  ferocious  contro- 
versies.— HOBNE  TOOKB. 

The  verbal  notion  as  such  is  nothing  but  a  copula. — 
TRANSLATED  FROM  GRAMMATIK  VON  CONRAD  HERMANN. 

Every  verb  admits  of  being  taken  apart  or  analyzed  into 
some  form  of  the  copula  be,  which  expresses  the  act  of  asser- 
tion, and  a  predicate  noun  or  adjective  (especially  the  verbal 
adjective,  the  present  participle)  expressing  the  condition 
or  quality  or  action  predicated. — WHITNEY. 

The  definition  of  the  verb  (as  the  word  which  asserts)  does 
not  provide  for  interrogative  or  imperative  sentences.  In- 
deed it  is  probably  impossible  to  define  the  verb  briefly 
and  clearly,  so  as  to  include  such  sentences.  The  interro- 
gative and  imperative  forms,  however,  may  be  so  easily 
changed  into  declarative  that  this  definition  will  not  be 
found  seriously  inadequate. — HARPER  AND  BURGESS. 

The  verb  makes  the  speaker  responsible.  If  we  say  "The 
boy"  we  utter  merely  a  name.  But  the  minute  we  add  a 
verb  to  the  name,  as,  "The  boy  lies,"  we  are  held  responsible 
for  a  statement. — LEWIS. 

We  cannot  assert  or  deny  without  a  finite  verb. — BAIN. 

It  is  a  quaint  saying  of  that  quaint,  and  yet  wise,  people, 
the  Chinese,  that  verbs  alone  are  living  words. — M.  SCHELB 
DE  VERB. 

43 


44  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

The  distinction  shown  to  the  verb  in  giving  it  a 
name  that  means  the  word  of  the  sentence,  seems  to 
require  that  its  definition  should  make  plain  its  super- 
iority as  a  sentence  element.  Yet  the  statement  of 
many  grammars  that  the  verb  is  "a  word  which  ex- 
presses being,  action,  or  state,"  misses  the  essential 
fact.  In  some  of  the  older  grammars  we  read  that 
"the  verb  is  a  word  that  signifies  to  do,  to  be,  or  to 
suffer,"  and  that  "it  may  be  distinguished  by  its 
making  sense  with  one  of  the  personal  pronouns  or 
the  word  to  before  it."  Such  statements  are  inade- 
quate as  definitions  of  the  verb. 

Among  ancient  grammarians  the  tense  variations 
attracted  attention  as  one  of  the  most  distinguishing 
features.  So  Aristotle  defined  a  verb  as  a  word  that 
can  express  time.  For  a  similar  reason  the  common 
German  word  for  verb  is  Zeit-wort,  or  "time-word." 
Some  grammarians  have  thought  the  power  to  denote 
action  the  most  conspicuous  feature  and  have  given 
names  expressive  of  the  idea  of  "deed -word."  AJ 
truer  thought  than  any  of  these,  however,  is  expressed 
by  Madvig,  the  German  author  of  a  celebrated  Latin 
grammar,  who  designates  the  verb  by  a  word  meaning 
"  ouisayings-word,"  because  it  "outsays,  asserts,  or] 
delivers  the  judgment  of  the  mind." 

The  force  of  this  definition  is  best  shown  by  the 
logical  rather  than  the  grammatical  view  of  the  sentence. 
This  is,  that  the  ideas  expressed  by  the  subject  and 
predicate  terms  in  every  sentence  are  brought  into 
comparison  and  the  mind  asserts  or  denies  the  agree- 


The  Verbal  Element  of  the  Sentence  45 

ment  of  these  ideas.  The  word  which  expresses  this 
mental  decision  is  the  copula,  or  true  verb.  It  is  the 
assertive  element  in  every  sentence  and  the  presence 
of  this  assertive  power  in  any  word  is  the  only  thing 
that  gives  it  a  true  verbal  character.  In  any  simple 
sentence  there  is  only  one  word  in  which  this  assertive  , 
power  is  lodged.  A  verb  may  be  logically  defined, 
therefore,  as  the  word  which  is  the  copula,  or  which 
contains  the  copula  of  the  judgment. 

When  the  verb  be  is  used  to  express  an  unchangeable 
or  a  general  truth,  it  is  a  pure  copula.  In  the  sentences, 
"God  is  good,"  "A  triangle  is  a  plane  figure,"  we 
find  the  copula  stripped  of  all  extraneous  ideas  and 
standing  alone  as  the  verb  of  the  sentence. 

Yet  the  verbal  element  is  seldom  found  thus  in  its 
naked  simplicity.  The  idea  to  be  predicated  has  many 
ways  in  which  it  can  unite  itself  with  the  copulative 
element.  There  are  also  many  accessory  ideas  of 
mood,  tense,  etc.,  to  be  conveyed,  so  that  the  verbal 
element  is  frequently  almost  lost  sight  of  in  the  host  of 
related  ideas  with  which  it  is  attended.  In  the  sen- 
tence, "He  sings,"  the  verb  contains  not  only  the 
assertive  element,  but  it  expresses  the  action  to  be 
predicated  as  well,  with  the  accessory  ideas  of  time, 
and  the  person  and  number  of  the  subject. 

But  although  the  student  of  advanced  grammar 
should  recognize  the  essentially  copulative  character 
of  the  verbal  office,  the  idea  that  the  verb  is  an  "  assert- 
ing" or  "stating"  word  will  be  sufficient  for  elementary 
classes.  Even  the  youngest  students  can  recognize  the 


46  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

word  in  the  predicate  whose  omission  would  remove 
all  power  of  assertion  from  the  sentence. 

The  objection  has  been  raised  that  to  define  a  verb 
as  "a  word  which  asserts  or  states  something  about 
a  person  or  thing,"  is  not  logical,  since  in  the  inter- 
rogatory or  imperative  sentence  no  assertion  is  made. 
As  a  substitute  for  the  assertive  idea,  some  grammarians 
have  proposed  the  definition,  "  A  verb  is  a  word  which 
when  placed  with  a  subject  can  form  a  sentence." 
But  this  transfers  the  difficulty  of  definition  to  the  word 
sentence.  It  also  excludes  the  copula  is  and  all  cop- 
ulative and  transitive  verbs,  which  cannot  form  a 
sentence  without  the  aid  of  an  attribute  or  object  fol- 
lowing. The  seeming  impossibility  of  defining  the 
"verb,"  without  falling  back  on  the  logical  rather 
than  the  grammatical  view  of  the  sentence,  is  an  illus- 
tration of  the  difficulties  that  are  often  encountered  in 
forming  accurate,  and  at  the  same  time  simple,  defini- 
tions of  grammatical  terms. 

In  the  verb-phrases  which  constitute  the  great  major- 
ity of  our  English  verbal  forms,  it  is  the  first  word  alone 
which  has  a  true  verbal  character.  All  the  other 
words  are  participles  and  infinitives,  which  although 
derived  from  verbs  are  grammatically  of  a  different 
nature.  In  the  sentence  "  The  house  might  have  been 
burned,"  the  assertive  element  is  wholly  within  the 
word  might.  The  predicate  idea,  however,  is  distrib- 
uted throughout  the  verb-phrase,  though  centered 
principally  in  the  participle  burned. 

The  logical  relations  of  the  words  of  the  predicate 


The  Verbal  Element  of  the  Sentence  47 

are  often  difficult  to  deal  with.  Yet  these  difficulties 
are  greatly  reduced  if  the  true  character  of  the  verb 
is  clearly  understood. 


X 

VERB  COMPLEMENTS 

The  thought  imposes  its  form  upon  the  sentence. — WISELY 

Complements  which  must  be  added  to  make  the  predicate 
complete  are  to  be  carefully  distinguished  from  words  that 
may  be  added  to  make  the  meaning  more  precise. — BUEHLER. 

Now,  my  dear  James,  if  I  have  succeeded  in  making  clear 
to  you  the  principle  out  of  which  the  use  of  these  words  .  . 
.   .  has  arisen,  I  have  accomplished  a  good  deal. — COBBETT'S 
GRAMMAR  (1818). 

The  three  fundamental  types  of  predicate  construc- 
tion may  be  illustrated  as  follows: 

1.  Dogs  bark. 

2.  The  child  seems  happy. 

3.  John  has  cut  his  finger. 

In  the  first  all  the  essential  elements  of  the  predicate 
are  in  the  verb  itself.  Other  words  may  be  added  but 
they  are  simply  modifiers  and  not  necessary  to  the  sen- 
tence construction. 

In  the  second  and  third  sentences  the  verbs  cannot 
be  used  as  predicates  without  the  completing  word  or 
"complement";  such  verbs  are  sometimes  loosely 
classed  together  as  "verbs  of  incomplete  predication." 
But  the  two  types  differ  essentially  both  in  the  character 
of  the  verb  itself  and  in  the  nature  and  relations  of  the 
complement. 

48 


Verb  Complements  49 

In  the  second  sentence  the  verb  "seems,"  though 
not  without  some  attributive  idea,  is  chiefly  a  connec- 
tive or  copula  for  the  outside  attribute  "  happy. "  Such 
a  verb  is  called  a  "copulative  verb,"  and  the  verbs  which 
are  most  frequently  used  in  copulative  relations  are  be, 
become,  seem,  appear,  taste,  smell,  look,  feel,  and  a 
few  others.  There  are  also  a  large  number  of  passive 
verb  phrases  which  (although  they  contain  in  them- 
selves a  kind  of  copula  and  attribute)  are  yet  used  as 
copulas  for  an  outside  term  which  is  the  real  attribute 
of  the  sentence.  Such  are  "is  made,"  "is  chosen," 
is  thought,"  etc.,  as,  "Washington  was  elected  Presi- 
dent of  the  United  States." 

Attribute  complements  are  of  many  kinds.  Nouns, 
pronouns,  adjectives,  participles,  infinitive  phrases, 
and  clauses,  may  all  be  used  in  this  relation,  as  follows : 

He  is  a  man. 

This  is  he. 

She  seems  happy. 

He  was  greatly  admired. 

This  is  to  be  deplored. 

The  fact  is  that  it  is  impossible. 

The  attribute  complement  is  always  subjective  in 
character.  If  it  is  a  noun  or  pronoun  it  means  the 
same  thing  as  the  subject.  If  it  is  an  adjective,  it  ex- 
presses a  quality  or  attribute  of  this  thing. 

In  the  first  and  third  types  of  predicate,  the  verbs 
bark  and  has  cut  alike  contain  the  copula  and  the  chief 
part  of  the  idea  to  be  predicated.  But  bark  is  a  com- 
plete verb.  Has  cut  differs  from  bark  in  being  also 


50  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

transitive;  that  is,  it  expresses  an  action  which  is  car- 
ried over  from  the  doer  to  a  passive  recipient  that  must 
also  be  named  in  order  that  the  meaning  shall  be  com- 
plete. 

Some  grammarians  distinguish  between  a  "true 
intransitive  verb/'  by  which  they  mean  one  that  never 
takes  an  object,  and  a  "transitive  verb  used  absolutely;" 
that  is,  one  usually  transitive  but  used  in  a  given  case 
without  an  object.  But  grammatical  classification  is 
according  to  the  function  of  a  word  in  the  sentence 
where  it  occurs.  The  omission  of  the  object  changes 
slightly  the  character  of  the  verb  itself,  making  it  more 
general  in  meaning.  It  seems  most  logical  to  follow 
the  classification  made  by  those  grammarians  who 
would  call  all  the  verbs  intransitive  in  such  a  sentence 
as  "The  man  eats,  laughs,  and  sleeps."  A  verb  usually 
intransitive  may  also  be  made  transitive  with  an  object 
of  kindred  signification  called  the  "cognate  object," 
as  "He  laughed  a  loud  laugh." 

The  complement  of  a  transitive  verb  is  always  ob- 
jective in  character.  After  a  reflexive  verb,  as  "  I  hurt 
myself,"  it  means  the  same  thing  as  the  subject, but  this 
is  still  thought  of  as  outside  and  objective.  The  object 
complement  ranks  higher  than  the  adverbial  modifier 
since  it  is  necessary  to  the  predicate  construction. 

All  verb  complements  belong  to  the  basic  part  of  the 
sentence.  The  subject,  verb,  and  complement  are  all 
needed  to  make  the  sentence  structure  complete. 

Object  complements  as  well  as  attributes,  vary  greatly, 
and  the  different  types  of  objects  will  be  considered  later. 


Verb  Complements  51 

Both  object  and  attribute  complements  offer  many 
stumbling  blocks  to  beginners  in  grammar.  But  if  the 
three  essential  types  of  predicate  construction  are  thor- 
oughly mastered  early  in  the  course,  many  of  the  diffi- 
culties of  grammatical  analysis  will  already  have  been 
conquered. 


XI 

THE  OBJECTIVE  CONSTRUCTIONS 

Many  verbs  take  two  substantives;  the  proper  object,  or 
the  accusative,  and  an  object  of  reference  to  which  the  action 
is  directed,  or  the  dative. — TRANSLATED  FROM  MADVIG'S 
LATIN  GRAMMAR. 

The  dative  denotes  in  general  the  person  or  thing  more 
remotely  connected  with  an  action. — TRANSLATED  FROM 
CURTIUS'S  GREEK  GRAMMAR. 

There  is  hardly  anything  more  interesting  than  to  see  how 
the  laws  of  grammar,  which  seem  at  first  sight  so  hard  and 
arbitrary,  are  simply  the  laws  of  the  expression  of  logical 
relations  in  concrete  form. — EVERETT. 

The  word  object  in  grammar  has  many  varieties  of 
technical  meaning. 

The  noun  or  pronoun  that  completes  the  meaning  of 
a  transitive  verb  by  naming  the  receiver  of  the  action 
is  the  object  of  the  verb.  Participles  and  infinitives 
share  with  verbs  the  power  to  take  objects.  Objects 
are  the  most  important  verb  modifiers.  They  belong 
to  the  basic  part  of  the  predicate. 

The  term  object  also  is  applied  to  a  noun  or  pronoun 
connected  by  a  preposition  as  a  subordinate  to  some 
other  word.  Objects  of  verbs  and  objects  of  prepositions 
are  alike  in  one  respect — they  must  be  in  the  objective 
(i.  e.  the  accusative)  case  if  the  word  used  has  such  a 
case.  Both  of  these  kinds  of  objects  are  easy  to  recog- 

52 


The  Objective  Constructions  53 

nize.  But  there  are  related  constructions  that  are 
more  difficult. 

There  is  the  indirect  or  "dative"  object,  as  "I  give 
you  my  hand."  It  has  many  subtle  marks  which  may 
or  may  not  all  be  present  in  a  given  case. 

If  the  indirect  object  follows  the  direct,  it  requires  the 
preposition  to,  or  for,  as  "  I  give  my  hand  to  you."  In  a 
few  cases  the  preposition  is  required  even  when  the  in- 
direct object  precedes  the  direct,  as  "I  accepted  for 
you  the  invitation." 

The  direct  and  indirect  objects  are  sometimes  spoken 
of  as  the  primary  and  secondary  objects  of  the  verb. 
In,  "They  sent  him  a  book,"  book  is  directly  related 
to  the  verb,  but  the  relation  of  him  is  rather  to  the 
whole  predicate;  that  is,  the  sending  of  the  book  was  to 
him . 

The  indirect  object  usually  denotes  a  person,  while 
the  direct  object  usually  means  a  thing.  The  indirect 
ob j  ect  is  not  always  a  personal  word  however,  as, 

Give  thy  thoughts  no  tongue. — SHAKESPEARE. 

There  are  also  cases  in  which  the  object  denoting  the 
person  is  nearly  direct,  and  the  one  meaning  the  thing 
becomes  indirect  (or  nearly  adverbial)  with  the  pre- 
position of.  Thus,  "They  told  me  the  circumstances," 
by  a  slight  change  becomes  "  They  told  me  of  the  cir- 
cumstances." If  either  of  the  two  objects  is  used 
without  the  other  it  is  direct,  as,  "I  paid  John  wages." 
"  I  paid  John."  "  I  paid  wages."  But  in  most  instances 
the  indirect  object  could  not  be  used  without  the  other. 


54  Grammar  and  Its  Reason* 

The  indirect  object  in  I^itin  and  some  other  languages 
takes  the  dative  case,  and  this  was  formerly  true  in 
English,  but  in  modern  English  the  objective  case  covers 
both  the  accusative  and  dative  uses.  The  verbs  ask, 
teach  and  a  few  others  in  Latin  give  the  accusative  form 
to  the  object  denoting  the  person  as  well  as  to  that  de- 
noting the  thing.  For  this  reason,  Kimball's  grammar 
and  a  few  others  call  both  objects  after  teach  direct  in 
English  as  well  as  in  Latin,  saying  also  that  teach  has  a 
different  meaning  with  the  two  objects.  Yet  there  is 
little  in  English  to  distinguish  the  two  objects  after 
teach  from  the  usual  construction  of  direct  and  indirect 
objects.  It  is  true  that  in  comparing  the  two  sentences, 
"He  taught  John  the  lesson,"  and  "He  gave  John  a 
book"  we  feel  that  the  thought  relation  of  John  to  the 
verb  is  closer  in  the  first  sentence  than  in  the  second. 
Yet  in  the  first  sentence  John  and  lesson  are  not  co- 
ordinate objects,  nor  equal  in  their  relations  to  taught. 
The  object  denoting  the  person  after  teach  has  a  measure 
of  indirectness  in  English,  even  though  in  Latin  such  a 
word  would  take  the  accusative  case. 

The  truth  seems  to  be  that  there  are  many  degrees 
of  indirectness  in  the  objective  relation  of  a  noun.  The 
indirect  object  may  be  thought  of  as  an  intermediate 
construction  shading  all  the  way  from  an  object  that  is 
nearly  direct  to  one  which  is  scarcely  different  from  an 
adverbial  phrase,  so  that  it  is  sometimes  difficult  to  see 
precisely  where  the  line  should  be  drawn  on  either  side. 

An  indirect  object  can  follow  a  passive  verb,  the  noun 
that  would  be  the  direct  object  of  the  active  voice  being 


The  Objective  Constructions  55 

made  the  subject,  as,  "An  apple  was  given  me."  In 
the  case  of  a  few  verbs  the  indirect  object  can  also  be 
made  the  subject  of  the  passive  voice,  while  the  direct 
object  remains  as  a  "retained  object,"  after  the  verb, 
as  "I  was  given  an  apple."  This  construction  is  pecu- 
liar to  English,  and  even  in  English  it  is  not  usually 
so  good  as  the  regular  form  of  the  passive  sentence. 
The  use  of  the  indirect  object  as  the  subject  of  the 
passive  seems  to  have  come  into  English  through  the 
medium  of  such  verbs  as  ask,  teach,  etc.,  which  in  Latin 
and  other  languages  take  two  accusatives.  But  the 
usage  has  extended  itself  to  a  few  other  verbs  as  well. 
A  pronoun  is  sometimes  added  to  a  verb  as  an  in- 
direct expletive  object,  referring  to  some  person  that 
may  be  supposed  to  be  interested  in  the  action,  as, 

He  kills  me  six  or  seven  dozen  Scots  at  a  breakfast. 
He  claps  you  an  iron  cap  on  head. — CABLYLE. 

This  construction  was  common  in  early  English. 

There  is  another  important  kind  of  objective  con- 
struction that  is  unfortunately  known  by  many  names, 
among  which  are  factitive  object,  and  objective  comple- 
ment, predicate  or  attribute.  The  factitive  object  follows 
a  direct  object  and  sustains  to  it  an  attributive  or  predi- 
cate relation,  so  that  both  parts  are  necessary  to  com- 
plete the  meaning  of  the  verb.  The  name  double  object 
has  sometimes  been  given  to  the  direct  object  with  this 
complementary  (or  attributive)  objective  term.  This 
factitive  object  (or  objective  attribute,  predicate,  etc.) 
may  be  a  noun  or  pronoun,  an  adjective,  a  participle, 


56  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

an  infinitive,  or  an  infinitive  copula  followed  by  an 
adjective  or  noun. 
Examples : 

They  made  him  captain. 
They  thought  him  wise. 
They  saw  him  running. 
They  asked  him  to  stay. 
They  begged  him  to  be  merciful. 

In  changing  a  sentence  containing  an  objective  at- 
tribute to  the  passive  voice  the  verb  becomes  a  copula- 
tive phrase,  the  direct  object  is  made  the  subject  and  the 
objective  attribute  becomes  the  attribute  of  the  sen- 
tence, as 

He  was  made  captain. 

In  such  sentences  as  "They  begged  him  to  be  merci- 
ful," him  is  in  a  sense  (and  is  often  called)  the  subject 
of  the  following  infinitive,  but  it  is  its  relation  to  begged 
rather  than  to  the  infinitive  that  determines  its  case 
form. 

The  sentence  "They  asked  him  to  stay"  is  not  very 
different  from  "They  asked  him  a  favor."  The  line 
between  the  construction  of  direct  and  indirect  object, 
and  that  of  objective  attribute  is  not  always  very  dis- 
tinct. 

The  objective  attribute  may  be  thought  of  as  filling 
out  the  meaning  of  a  transitive  verb  which  is  not  of 
itself  able  to  express  fully  the  action  performed  on  its 
object.  Thus,  "Ice  keeps  the  water  cool" — i.  e.  "Ice 
keeps  cool  the  water." 

The  objective  constructions  present  many  difficulties 


The  Objective  Constructions  57 

to  students  of  English.  But  if  the  main  types  are  well 
understood  a  careful  comparison  with  these  types  will 
usually  show  clearly  to  which  class  a  given  construction 
belongs. 


XII 
SUBJECT  AND  PREDICATE  NOUNS 

Position  does  by  no  means  necessarily  conform  to  the 
order  of  thought. — WELSH. 

Welcome  from  the  student  the  widest  range  of  interpreta- 
tion of  the  sentence  under  examination.  The  syntax  may 
often  assume  several  different  aspects  as  the  thought  ia 
capable  of  being  conceived  in  different  shades  of  meaning. 
— DAVENPORT  AND  EMERSON. 

It  is  sometimes  difficult  to  distinguish  between  the 
subject  and  predicate  nouns  of  a  sentence.  Such  a  case 
seldom  occurs,  however,  except  in  interrogative  and 
inverted  sentences,  or  where  a  rhetorical  element  pre* 
vails. 

In  a  purely  definitive  sentence  the  predicate  noun  ha^ 
the  relation  of  a  genus  to  the  species  named  by  the 
subject,  as  "Dogs  are  intelligent  animals."  In  manj 
other  cases  the  subject  represents  an  individual  and  the 
predicate  term  shows  the  species  to  which  it  belongs, 
as  "Caesar  is  a  dog."  In  all  such  sentences  the  predi- 
cate noun  has  a  meaning  which  is  wider  in  its  extent 
than  that  of  the  subject,  and  the  two  are  clearly  differ- 
entiated. 

But  there  are  cases  where  the  two  terms  are  equally 
specific  or  equally  generic,  and  therefore  of  equal  extent 
in  their  meaning,  as  "A  mirror  is  a  looking-glass." 

58 


Subject  and  Predicate  Nouns  59 

In  such  cases  the  presumption  would  naturally  be  in 
favor  of  making  the  first  term  the  subject.  Yet  in 
poetical  or  highly  rhetorical  sentences  there  is  some- 
times a  chance  for  difference  of  opinion. 

The  general  principle  to  be  applied  seems  to  be  that 
the  subject  represents  an  idea  in  the  speaker's  mind 
that  is  supposed  to  be  unknown  to  the  hearer  or  regard- 
ing which  some  unknown  fact  is  to  be  communicated. 
In  "The  wages  of  sin  is  death,"  is  the  speaker  trying 
to  show  what  constitutes  death,  or  is  it  the  wages  of  sin 
whose  character  is  to  be  revealed  ?  If  the  latter,  then 
wages  of  sin,  being  the  unknown  term,  is  the  subject  of 
the  sentence. 

An  interrogative  pronoun  which  introduces  a  ques- 
tion may  stand  either  as  the  subject  or  the  predicate 
term. 

Who  will  be  our  messenger? 
James  will  be  our  messenger. 
Who  was  Plato? 
Plato  was  a  Greek  philosopher. 

The  answers  to  these  questions  show  that  who  is  the 
subject  in  the  first  interrogative  sentence,  but  the  predi- 
cate term  in  the  second. 

But  there  are  sentences  in  literature  in  which  either 
term  might  be  construed  as  subject,  though  the  thought 
would  differ  slightly  in  the  two  cases.  In  "Alfred 
Austin  is  the  Poet  Laureate,"  a  change  in  emphasis 
would  change  the  relation  of  the  subject  and  predicate 
terms. 


60  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

A  similar  ambiguity  between  the  subject  and  the 
object  of  a  verb  sometimes  occurs.  An  inversion  which 
places  the  object  in  advance  is  sometimes  admissible. 
Yet  (especially  if  both  words  are  nouns)  it  may  create 
an  uncertainty  as  to  the  true  relations.  In  the  words 
of  Professor  Bain,  "It  is  by  this  construction  that  we 
can  practice  oracular  ambiguity,  as  *The  duke  yet 
lives  that  Henry  shall  depose.' 

Several  years  ago  the  New  England  Journal  of  Edu- 
cation published  an  article  by  Paul  Standish,  giving  the 
opinions  of  noted  persons  as  to  the  subject  and  object 
in  a  well-known  line  of  Gray's  Elegy : 

And  all  the  air  a  solemn  stillness  holds. 

In  presenting  the  question  to  his  readers,  the  writer 
says,   "Don't  be  too  positive  in  your  reply.     Wiser  > 
heads  than  ours  differ  in  their  opinion,  and  always  will.  • 
If  you  are  sure  now  that  it  is  air  that  holds  the  stillness, 
the  probability  is  that  in  five  minutes  you  will  be  inn 
clined  to  believe  that  it  is  stillness  that  holds  the  air  and 
you  are  liable  to  get  into  a  frame  of  mind  where  you 
have  no  opinion  whatever  on  the  subject." 

Of  seventy-six  replies  to  this  question  from  high 
authorities  in  the  educational  and  literary  world, 
thirty-nine  favored  stillness,  twenty-six  favored  air, 
and  eleven  were  in  doubt.  One  noted  Massachusetts 
judge  after  expressing  a  positive  opinion,  added : 

"  P.  S. — On  further  reflection  I  am  on  the  fence." 

Such  instances  as  these  may  well  remind  the  gram- 
marian not  to  be  over  positive  in  his  opinion.  Both 


Subject  and  Predicate  Nouns  61 

interpretations  may  sometimes  be  correct.  Many  a 
writer  has  written  sentences  of  larger  import  than  he 
himself  knew  in  penning  them.  In  the  discussion  of  the 
subtler  questions  of  syntax,  it  is  not  the  decision  reached 
that  is  of  chief  importance.  It  is  the  power  of  thinking 
gained  by  the  effort  to  compare  and  discriminate  the 
relations  of  a  thought  that  is  of  truest  educational  value. 


XIII 

INFLECTIONS 

The  old  wealth  of  forms  is  now  thrown  aside  as  a  dis- 
pensable burden. — SCHLEICHER. 

"  The  exhibition  of  the  system  of  English  inflection  must 
constitute  the  main  part  of  an  English  grammar.  But  we 
are  not  to  import  unreal  distinctions  out  of  a  foreign  tongue 
or  theoretical  distinctions  out  of  a  system  of  logic." 

How  bare — whether  too  bare  is  another  question — we 
have  stripped  ourselves. — TRENCH. 

The  English,  which  from  the  mode  of  its  formation  by 
a  mixture  of  different  tongues,  has  been  stripped  of  its 
grammatical  inflections  more  completely  than  any  other 
European  language,  seems  nevertheless,  even  to  a  foreigner, 

to  be  distinguished  by  energetic  eloquence 

Yet  it  cannot  be  overlooked  that  this  copiousness  of  gram- 
matical forms  [in  Greek]  and  the  fine  shades  of  meaning 
which  they  express,  evince  a  nicety  of  observation  and  a 
faculty  of  distinguishing  which  unquestionably  prove  that 
the  race  of  mankind  among  whom  these  arose  was  character- 
ized by  a  remarkable  correctness  and  subtlety  of  thought. 
....  In  the  ancient  languages  the  words  with  their  inflec- 
tions, clothed  as  it  were  with  muscles  and  sinews,  come 
forward  like  living  bodies  full  of  expression  and  character, 
while  in  the  modern  tongues  the  words  seem  shrunk  up 
into  mere  skeletons. — OTFRIED  MULLER'S  LITERATURE  OP 
GREECE. 

The  chief  ideas  now  expressed  by  English  inflection  are 
seven:  number,  person,  time,  comparison,  ownership,  the 

62 


Inflections  63 

subject  relation  and  the  object  relation.     No  one  word  con- 
tains all  these  ideas. — LEWIS. 

The  most  elaborate  system  of  inflection  still  leaves  some-   ' 
thing  unexpressed. — BAIN. 

The  Anglo-Saxon,  which  is  the  basis  of  the  English 
tongue,  was  a  highly  inflected  language.  But  the  Nor- 
man Conquest,  besides  bringing  into  English  a  large 
vocabulary  of  new  words,  inaugurated  the  long  process 
by  which  the  structure  of  the  language  itself  was  radi- 
cally changed. 

It  has  been  said  that  "A  French  family  settled  in 
England  and  edited  the  English  language."  Perhaps 
the  truer  statement  would  be  that  the  Normans  found 
it  too  much  trouble  to  learn  the  Saxon  inflections  and 
so  ignored  them.  At  any  rate  most  of  the  old  Saxon 
terminations  gradually  disappeared,  and  with  these 
some  of  the  "governments  and  agreements"  that  de- 
pend upon  inflection  disappeared  also.  By  the  end 
of  the  fourteenth  century  the  process  was  nearly  com- 
pleted, and  the  invention  of  printing  during  the  follow- 
ing century  established  the  general  fixity  of  forms  that 
has  prevailed  since  that  era. 

Inflection  is  the  general  name  for  all  grammatical 
changes  in  the  forms  of  words.  These  changes  are 
produced  as  a  rule  by  adding  various  terminations  to 
the  stem  or  root;  but  changes  within  the  words,  as 
mouse  plural  mice,  are  also  called  inflections. 

Inflectional  phenomena  are  of  two  kinds,  living  and 
dead.  Certain  inflections  have  become  fixed  for  specific 
words,  but  are  no  longer  used  in  making  new  forms 


64 


Grammar  and  its  Reasons 


as,  who,  whose,  whom.  Others  are  freely  used  to 
make  forms  of  new  words  after  a  prescribed  pattern 
as  the  plural  in  s,  or  past  tenses  in  ed. 

The  name  Declension  has  been  given  to  a  tabulated 
statement  of  the  inflectional  forms  of  a  substantive. 
The  word  comes  from  a  fanciful  device,  that  seems 
almost  childish  to  modern  minds,  in  which  an  upright 
line  represented  the  nominative  case,  and  declining  lines 
the  other  cases,  as 


A  summary  of  the  inflectional  forms  of  a  verb  is  called 
its  "  conjugation."  There  is  very  little  of  conjugation 
belonging  to  modern  English  verbs. 

The  name  of  each  specific  inflection,  as  person,  case, 
mood,  etc.,  has  had  a  somewhat  indeterminate  value  in 
grammatical  usage,  and  has  been  variously  defined  as  a 
form,  property,  distinction,  condition,  etc.  That  there 
is  some  inherent  reason  for  this  lack  of  unity  in  defini- 
tion must  be  acknowledged.  Some  of  the  so-called 
inflections  seem  to  extend  themselves  to  cover  subtle 
relations  where  the  true  inflection  is  wanting.  It  need 
not  be  thought  strange  that  there  has  been  wide  divers- 


Inflections  65 

ity  among  grammarians  regarding  the  treatment  of  the 
inflections. 

But  the  sensible  way  of  dealing  with  the  subject  is 
that  which  is  adopted  by  most  modern  text-books. 
Case,  number,  mood,  etc.,  are  regarded  as  genuine  in- 
flections, that  is,  as  true  grammatical  changes  in  the 
forms  of  words  themselves.  Only  such  are  named  as 
are  really  to  be  found  in  English  words.  The  student 
should  be  an  investigator  in  this  field,  searching  for  all 
the  traces  of  these  inflectional  forms  which  he  can  find. 
Yet,  as  he  discovers  certain  "agreements"  where  the 
form  of  the  governing  word  is  non-committal,  the  idea 
of  a  subtle  property  that  goes  beyond  the  formal  inflec- 
tion is  awakened  in  his  mind. 

A  knowledge  of  Latin,  or  some  other  inflected  lan- 
guage, though  not  a  substitute  for  the  English  study, 
is  of  great  help  here.  As  the  student  grasps  the  larger 
knowledge  which  historical  and  comparative  grammar 
can  throw  upon  these  questions,  the  remnants  of  the 
English  inflections  gain  a  wider  interest  and  are  appre- 
hended with  truer  value. 


XIV 

GOVERNMENT  AND  AGREEMENT 

The  repetition  of  the  inflection  of  a  head-word  in  its  ad- 
junct-word is  called  concord,  and  the  words  are  said  to  agree 
in  whatever  grammatical  form  they  have  in  common. — 
SWEET. 

Rules  are  the  elastic  expression  of  the  custom  of  a  language. 
— Independent. 

Rules  have  been  laid  down  which  never  had  any  existence 
outside  of  the  minds  of  the  grammarians  and  verbal  critics. 
— LOUNSBURY. 

Concord  is  not  a  necessity  of  language;  while  in  the  de- 
gree that  it  prevails  in  Latin  and  in  Greek,  it  is  a  serious  in- 
cumbrance. — BAIN. 

The  verb  needs  not,  and  generally  does  not,  agree  with 
its  nominative  case  in  number  and  person, — active  verbs  do 
not  govern  the  objective  case  or  any  other, — prepositions  do 
not  govern  the  objective  case  or  any  other. — RICHARD  GRANT 
WHITE. 

To  parse  agreement  whenever  a  distinct  form  of  the  verb 
marks  a  particular  number  (as  in  are  and  were)  or  when- 
ever a  distinct  form  marks  a  particular  person  and  number 
(as  in  am,  is,  and  loves)  and  to  say  nothing  about  agreement 
when  there  is  no  such  distinct  form , — is  the  simple  rule  that 
we  would  urge  upon  teachers. — TOLMAN. 

A  verb  must  not  disagree  with  its  subject  in  number  and 
person. — LEWIS. 

In  an  abridgment  of    Murray's    grammar  that 

66 


Government  and  Agreement  C7 

extensively  used  in  the  earlier  half  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  after  the  twenty-one  rules  of  syntax,  with  their 
numerous  notes  and  exceptions,  we  find  a  "  Synopsis  of 
Syntax"  divided  into  the  two  sections  of  "Concord" 
and  "Government." 

Under  "Concord"  are  given  rules  showing  that 
articles,  substantives,  adjectives,  pronouns,  and  verbs 
have  "agreement"  with  other  words  to  which  they 
relate. 

Under  "Government"  it  is  shown  that  substantives, 
adjectives,  pronouns,  verbs,  participles,  prepositions, 
conjunctions,  and  interjections — all  of  the  parts  of 
speech,  in  fact,  except  adverbs — may  govern  other  words. 

Doubtless  all  of  these  rules  have  an  element  of  truth 
in  them.  The  first  rule  under  "Concord"  states  that 
"Articles  agree  with  nouns  in  number, "  which  seems  to 
be  a  large  generalization  from  the  fact  that  a  or  an 
because  of  its  meaning,  belongs  always  to  a  singular 
noun. 

Another  rule  states  that  "Adjectives  and  adjective 
pronouns  generally  agree  in  number  with  the  substan- 
tives to  which  they  belong";  which  is  also  a  very  com- 
prehensive statement,  for  the  fact  that  this  and  that 
have  plural  forms;  and  that  few,  several,  many,  and 
some  other  adjectives  because  of  their  meaning  belong 
to  plural  nouns,  while  each  and  every  belong  to  singular 
nouns.  But  the  modern  grammarian  feels  that  it 
would  be  better  to  state  the  specific  fact  in  relation  to 
these  words,  than  to  try  to  cover  these  individual  points 
by  a  universal  statement. 


68  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

That  the  English  language  has  something  of  govern- 
ment and  agreement  should  be  made  clear.  In  the 
sentences,  "The  man  laughs,"  "The  men  laugh,"  the 
noun  "governs"  the  number  and  person  of  the  verb, 
and  conversely  the  verb  "agrees"  with  its  subject. 
Full  recognition  of  all  such  facts  should  be  given  in 
grammar. 

The  facts  of  government  that  can  be  stated  as  princi- 
ples are  these : 

A  copula  takes  the  same  case  after  it  as  before  it. 
In  the  case  of  a  finite  verb  this  will  be  the  nominative; 
in  infinitive  phrases  it  is  objective. 

Transitive  verbs  and  prepositions  "govern"  the 
objective  case. 

An  antecedent  governs  the  number,  person,  and 
gender  of  the  following  pronoun,  and  a  subject  governs 
its  verb  in  number  and  person. 

Conversely,  the  facts  of  concord  are  these: 

Verbs  agree  with  subjects  in  person  and  number,  anJ 
pronouns  agree  with  their  antecedents  in  number  and 
gender.     An    attribute    complement     (except    in    im- 
personal sentences  such  as  "It  is  they")  agrees  with 
its  subject  in  number,  gender,  and  case. 

But  while  each  of  the  foregoing  statements  is  someJ 
times  true,  it  is  only  applicable  when  the  word  to  be 
governed  has  the  requisite  properties  that  make  it  gov-< 
ernable,  and  in  modern  English  these  occasions  are  sol 
rare  that  they  are  the  exception  rather  than  the  rule! 
of  the  language.  „ 

The  older  English  had  far  more  of  government  aiul 


Government  and  Agreement  C9 

agreement  than  modern  English  has.  Latin  and 
Greek  and  the  modern  European  languages  also  have 
more.  The  relations  of  words  in  Latin  are  shown 
by  these  agreements,  but  in  English  the  logical  relations 
are  discovered  by  other  means  than  word  forms.  Ar- 
rangement and  emphasis  have  large,  though  subtle, 
effects  in  fixing  these  word  relations. 

We  must  still  recognize  "concord"  and  "govern- 
ment" as  facts  of  the  English  language.  But  we  may 
wisely  forbear  to  use  so  large  a  mould  for  holding  our 
grammatical  truths  as  the  rules  of  agreement  in  the 
older  grammars. 


XV 

PERSON 

Person  is  the  foundation  of  the  conception  of  the  pro- 
noun. It  can  only  be  attributed  to  nouns,  of  which  it  is  no 
proper  function.  It  belongs  to  verbs  only  by  transfer  from 
pronouns,  the  personal  endings  of  the  verbs  being  all  orig- 
inally affixed  pronouns. — JOYNES. 

The  want  of  the  so-called  verbal  inflections  for  number 
and  person  can  hardly  be  considered  an  imperfection  in  the 
English  language;  for  inflection,  though  it  may  reduce  the 
number  of  words,  gives  us  no  greater  precision,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  less  force  in  these  respects  than  may  be  obtained 
by  the  use  of  auxiliary  pronouns  and  other  determinatives. 
— MARSH. 

It  is  no  real  wealth  to  a  language  to  have  needless  and 
superfluous  forms. — TRENCH. 

In  an  abridgment  of  Murray's  Grammar  in  com- 
mon use  in  the  earlier  half  of  the  century,  the  subject 
of  grammatical  person  is  briefly  treated  as  follows :  "  / 
is  the  first  person.  Thou  is  the  second  person.  He, 
she,  or  it  is  the  third  person." 

This  little  text-book  of  a  past  generation  has  some 
elaborations  which  seem  to  darken  counsel  by  an  ex- 
cess of  grammatical  illumination.  But  in  the  sim- 
plicity of  its  treatment  of  person,  we  believe  that  it 
might  point  a  moral  for  some  modern  grammarians 
who  wrestle  with  the  disputed  question  whether  per- 

70 


Person  71 

son  is  an  "accident,"  a  "distinction,"  a  " proper! \ 
an    "inflection,"   or   a  what-not   of   certain   parts   of 
speech. 

After  all,  what  is  there  of  person  in  English  besides 
the  name  of  a  small  class  of  pronouns,  and  a  few  verbal 
forms  which  agree  with  these  pronouns  ? 

We  might  add  that  since  the  third  person  of  the 
verb  is  also  used  with  noun  subjects  and  with  the  in- 
declinable pronouns,  there  is  a  remote  sense  in  which 
these  words  also  may  be  accredited  with  something 
of  grammatical  person. 

The  three  persons  of  the  pronoun  are  not  really  an 
inflection  of  a  part  of  speech.  They  are  distinct 
words  with  which  this  personal  idea  is  associated.  The 
only  inflection  of  person  that  exists  in  English  is  the 
small  remnant  that  is  found  in  verbs.  There  are  two 
forms  for  the  third  person  singular  in  the  present  tense, 
—a  modern  form  ending  in  s,  and  an  ancient  one  in  th 
or  eth.  There  is  also  a  second  person  singular  used 
with  the  subject  thou  in  all  tenses.  Though  too  archaic 
for  common  use,  this  is  still  the  approved  form  for 
prayer  and  for  poetry,  and  should  be  thoroughly 
familiar. 

The  verb  be  has  more  of  person  than  other  verbs; 
yet  the  number  of  its  personal  forms  is  not  large.  They 
are  very  important,  however,  as  they  are  in  constant 
use  both  as  principal  verbs  and  as  auxiliaries. 

The  syntax  of  the  subject  of  person  is  chiefly  con- 
tained in  the  following  rule:  "A  verb  and  its  subject 
must  agree  in  person  and  in  number,  when  both  have 


72  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

the  requisite  person  and  number."  The  rule  is  an  im- 
portant and  rigid  one,  but  its  applications  are  com- 
paratively few,  as  verbs  seldom  have  "the  requisite 
person  and  number." 

There  is  another  rule  of  syntax  (or  perhaps  of  polite- 
ness)  less  important  than  the  other,  which  as-i^ns  the 
following  order  of  precedence  to  the  grammatical  per- 
sons in  compound  phrases: — 

You,  and  he,  and  I. 

There  is  also  a  principle  of  agreement  in  case  of  a 
compound  antecedent,  which  is  illustrated  by  the 
following  sentences: — 

You  and  I  will  take  our  books. 

You  and  he  will  take  your  books. 

But  the  inflection  and  syntax  of  grammatical  per- 
son is  a  short  subject  if  we  do  not  weigh  it  down  by 
unnecessary  rules  and  definitions. 


XVI 

NUMBER 

To  Singular  Nouns  we  always  add  an  (s) 
When  we  the  Plural  Number  wou'd  express; 
Or  (es)  for  more  delightful  easie  sound 
Whene'er  the  Singular  to  end  is  found 
tin  (x)  or  (z)  (ch)  (sh)  or  (s) 
(Ce)  (ge)  when  they  their  softer  sound  express. 

—SiR  RICHARD  STEELE'S  GRAMMAR,  1712,  DEDICATED  TO 
THE  QUEEN. 

As  there  is  a  common  gender  so  there  ought  to  have  been 
a  common  or  neutral  number. — BAIN. 

"Grammatical  phenomena  are  of  two  kinds,  living  and 
dead.  The  living  are  still  freely  used  to  form  new  inflected 
and  derived  words  on  the  pattern  of  those  already  existing, 
—as  the  plural  s." 

English  like  most  other  languages  has  two  numbers, 
the  singular  which  expresses  one-ness  (or  else  leaves 
the  number  indefinite,  as  "The  lion  is  the  King  of 
bmsts")  and  the  plural  which  expresses  more-than- 
ono-ness.  A  few  languages  have  also  a  dual  number 
r<  \ssing  two-ness,  and  this  was  true  of  Old  English. 
In  languages  having  a  dual  number  the  plural  expres 
inorc-than-two-ness.  Thus  in  Old  English  the  plural 
we  implied  at  least  three  persons,  "we-two"  being 
Dressed  by  an  ancient  dual  form  "wit."  A  remnant 
of  the  old  English  dual  number  is  found  in  the  word 

73 


74  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

twain  and  its  contracted  form  twin,  the  latter  having  a 
newly  formed  plural  twins.  Another  trace  of  the 
distinction  between  dual  and  plural  is  found  in  the 
reciprocal  pronoun  phrases  "each  other"  and  "one 
.mother." 

Number  is  the  most  widely  extended  of  all  the  in- 
flections. It  belongs  to  most  nouns,  to  the  personal 
pronouns,  to  soim»  verbal  forms,  and  to  the  adjectives 
////*  and  that.  This  range  does  not  seem  very  large, 
however,  and  beyond  tliis  we  look  in  vain  for  the  gram- 
matical inflection  of  number. 

The  regular  plurals  in  English  now  end  in  s.  To 
conform  to  certain  laws  of  spelling  or  of  euphony  the 
termination  is  often  es,  as,  ladies,  taxes.  After  x9 
sh,  ch,  s,  and  other  sibilant  sounds  this  must  be  pro- 
nounced as  a  separate  syllable. 

The  so-called  irregular  plurals  are  mostly  survivals 
of  old  Saxon  regular  forms.  They  are  not  to  be  thought 
of  as  defects  but  should  be  explained  and  classified. 
There  are  the  strong  plurals  formed  by  an  internal 
change,  as  teeth,  mice.  These  were  formerly  more 
numerous  than  at  present.  Another  form  of  Saxon 
plural  is  found  in  oxen.  Some  plurals  in  n  that  v>  ere 
formerly  in  use  may  still  be  heard  in  some  parts  of 
England  and  Scotland,  as  hosen,  shoon. 

A  few  forms  >how  the  results  of  mixed  processes, 
as  children,  brethren.  Thus  child  had  an  old  plural 
childer,  and  the  present  form  combines  this  with  the 
plural  inflection  in  n. 

Notwithstanding  its  larger  extent,   number  seems, 


Number  75 

at  first  thought,  to  be  the  simplest  of  the  inflections. 
Certainly,  the  main  rule  for  plurals  of  nouns  is  easy  to' 
be  understood  and  can  be  learned  by  children  at  an 
early  age.  Yet  when  the  specific  and  exceptional  rules 
have  also  been  mastered,  the  teacher  may  well  feel  that 
a  large  territory  has  been  covered.  There  are  nouns 
ending  in  y,  o,  f,  and  fe  to  be  considered.  There  are 
old  English  plurals,  and  foreign  plurals,  nouns  with 
two  plurals  and  with  no  plurals,  nouns  which  are  com- 
pound words,  and  those  consisting  of  a  title  and  a 
name  together,  all  of  these  requiring  special  In -at  merit. 

Among  the  nouns  ending  in  /,  it  will  be  noticed  that 
those  that  retain  the  /  in  the  plural  are  mostly  Norman 
French,  as  chiefs,  while  those  that  have  ves  are  Saxon 
in  origin,  as  wives.  Beef,  however,  is  an  exception. 
Its  plural  beeves  suggests  an  analogy  with  the  Latin  bor 

News  and  tidings,  now  singular,  were  originally 
treated  as  plurals.  Thus  Roger  Ascham  wrote  (15.50) 
"There  are  many  news."  Wages,  dregs,  pains,  ashes 
and  other  words  have  all  been  treated  in  both  ways. 
A  large  class  of  plurals  is  made  up  of  the  names  of  par 
as  tongs,  reins,  snuffers,  etc.  These  are  sometimes 
called  false  plurals.  It  is  often  well  to  use  the  word 
pair  with  these  and  give  the  phrase  its  true  singular 
construction  as,  "A  pair  of  scissors." 

Many  foreign  words  introduced  into  EiurliMi  have 
brought  their  plurals  with  them,  as  phenomena,  foci. 
The  grammar  student  should  classify  these  foreign 
plurals  according  to  the  principles  of  the  languages  from 
which  they  come. 


76  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

But  it  is  no  part  of  the  purpose  of  this  book  to  set 
forth  specifically  the  irregularities  of  English  number. 
These  are  included  in  every  text-book  in  grammar  and 
are  discussed  minutely  in  the  orthographic  chapters  of 
the  dictionaries.  The  subject  is  an  important  one,  but 
the  forms  are  to  be  learned  chiefly  in  the  constructive 
lessons  of  elementary  language  teaching  rather  than 
as  a  part  of  the  science  of  grammar. 

After  the  study  of  number  forms,  comes  the  syntax 
of  number.  Verbs  must  be  kept  in  proper  agreement, 
with  special  attention  given  to  cases  where  the  subject 
is  a  collective  noun,  or  is  accompanied  by  a  modifier. 
The  agreement  of  the  pronoun  with  its  antecedent 
requires  careful  consideration,  especially  when  the 
possessive  forms  are  used,  as  "Each  of  them  took  his 
books." 

In  some  instances  the  number  form  of  the  verb  is 
determined  by  the  general  sense  to  be  conveyed,  rather 
than  by  the  number  form  of  the  subject,  as  "  Bread  and 
milk  is  good  food  for  children."  This  is  especially  true 
when  a  collective  noun  is  limited  by  a  following  phrase, 
as  "A  large  number  of  the  men  were  disappointed." 

There  are  many  words  and  phrases  that  contain  a 
hovering  sense  of  either  singular  or  plural,  so  that  per- 
sonal judgment  is  sometimes  a  factor  in  determining 
the  form  to  be  used,  as  "  Already  a  train  or  two  (has  ? 
have?)  come  in."  But  such  questions  should  usually 
be  avoided  by  a  change  in  construction. 

Many  passages  in  literature  might  be  quoted  in 
which  the  number  agreement  is  different  from  that 


Number  77 

which  modern  English  requires,  as  "How  many  num- 
bers is  in  nouns  ?  Two. ' ' — Shakespeare. 

Shall  we  say  "Twice  two  are  four,"  or  "is  four?" 
Is  "Measles  are  prevalent,"  or  "is  prevalent/' 
correct  form  of  speech?    These  and   kindred   qi. 
tions   are   often   presented   to   the  grammarian,   v 
sometimes  has  to  fling  himself  free  from  the  tendency 
to  hair-splitting  and  belittling  discussions,  and  enter 
larger  fields  of  linguistic  thought. 

What  is  the  plural  of  tailor's  goose?  Is  it  geese  or 
gooses?  This  is  an  example  of  a  class  of  grammatical 
questions  that  are  often  asked.  The  story  is  told  of  a 
tailor  who  avoided  the  question  by  writing  his  order 
for  two  of  these  useful  implements  as  follows: 

Wanted — one  goose. 
Also — another  goose. 

And  was  he  not  right  ?  "  Good  style"  avoids  even  the 
appearance  of  grammatical  incongruity.  Yet  another 
has  rightly  said,  "  The  plural  of  tailor's  goose  is  goose- 


irons.9' 


Number  is  a  grammatical  property  that  must  be 
dealt  with,  and  many  specific  points  must  be  noted. 
Yet  the  wise  student  will  not  linger  too  long  over  its 
minute  details  but  pass  on  to  larger  investigations  of 
more  broadening  grammatical  truths. 


xvn 

GENDER 

English  surpasses  in  the  simplicity  of  gender  all  other 
languages,  and  has  established  its  claim  to  be  the  most  philo- 
sophic among  idioms. — M.  SCHELE  DE  VERB. 

Latin  has  the  English  gender  distinction  by  sex,  and  in 
addition  to  it  (but  not  in  conflict  with  it)  the  system  of  gen- 
der by  endings.  Only  those  nouns  which  have  no  gender 
according  to  the  English  Syntax,  are  divided  into  masculine, 
feminine,  and  neuter  endings. — HARPER  AND  BURGESS. 

"Young  nations,  and  those  having  a  lively  imagination 
impute  sex  to  many  lifeless  objects.  Thus  the  Algonquin 
tribes,  as  well  as  the  German  nation  have  many  facts  of  gen- 
der that  come  from  the  imaginary  world  in  which  the  people 
are  inclined  to  dwell.  *  *  *  But  English  is  a  practical 
business-like  language." 

Sex,  whether  fanciful  or  real,  has  no  proper  connection 
with  gender. — STRONG,  LOGEMAN  AND  WHEELER. 

Gender  is  no  natural  distinction  in  language. — PEILE'S 
PHILOLOGY. 

Nothing   hinders   us   from   supposing   that   grammatical 
gender  originally  meant  something  quite  different  from  sex. 
JESPEBSEN. 

"In  Germany,  a  gentleman  writes  a  masculine  letter  of 
feminine  love  to  a  neuter  young  lady,  with  a  feminine  pen 
and  feminine  ink  on  masculine  sheets  of  neuter  paper,  and 
encloses  it  in  a  masculine  envelope  with  a  feminine  address 
to  his  darling,  though  neuter,  Gretchen.  He  has  a  masculine 
head,  a  feminine  hand  and  a  neuter  heart.  A  masculine 

78 


Gender  79 

father  and  a  feminine  mother  have  neuter  children.    They 
eat  neuter  bread,  feminine  butter  and  masculine  cheese." 

Those  who  are  born  to  the  English  idiom  and  are  blessed 
in  the  absence  of  nominal  gender  in  their  mother  tongue 
cannot  help  looking  at  its  existence  in  other  languages  as 
a  useless  complication  of  linguistic  machinery. — STARCK. 

The  lack  of  grammatical  gender  in  English  has  enriched 
the  language  with  poetical  gender.  The  figure  of  personifi- 
cation is  denied  to  languages  having  nominal  gender. — 
JOYNES. 

Gender  in  modern  English  is  a  very  different  gram- 
matical property  from  that  which  belongs  to  most 
inflected  languages.  The  office  of  gender  forms  in 
English  is  to  show  sex.  Yet  in  general  grammar,  gender 
is  usually  a  matter  of  the  form  of  a  word  and  of  its 
agreements  with  other  words,  and  seems  only  remotely 
connected  with  the  idea  of  sex.  Many  scholars  believe 
that  the  gender  forms  of  general  grammar  were  originally 
sex  forms,  and  that  they  came  into  use  by  poetically 
attributing  sex-qualities  to  inanimate  objects.  This 
is  a  matter  of  conjecture,  however,  rather  than  of  proof. 
Jesperson  and  some  other  recent  writers  on  language 
have  expressed  doubts  as  to  whether  this  is  the  true 
origin  of  grammatical  gender. 

If  gender  in  English  be  considered  strictly  as  an  in- 
flection it  belongs  exclusively  to  a  very  small  number 
of  nouns,  such  as  actor,  actress.  Even  these  might  per- 
haps be  ruled  out  as  being  two  words  having  the  same 
root,  rather  than  grammatical  forms  of  the  same  word. 

Somewhere  in  the  English  language  course,  whether 
under  the  head  of  grammar  or  of  word  formation,  the 


80  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

student  needs  to  become  acquainted  with  the  feminine 
suffixes.  The  most  important  of  these  is  ess,  used  in 
certain  titles  of  nobility  for  a  wife  who  shares  the  honors 
of  her  husband,  as  baron,  baroness;  also  in  a  few  cases 
it  indicates  a  woman  who  holds  in  her  own  right  an 
occupation  or  character  that  may  belong  to  either  sex, 
as  prophetess;  heiress.  Ine  in  heroine,  a  in  sultana, 
trix  in  executrix,  are  also  feminine  suffixes  that  have 
come  into  English  from  various  sources,  but  are  not 
used  in  new  formations.  Ess  is  the  only  living  feminine 
suffix,  that  is,  the  only  one  that  can  be  used  to  make 
new  word  forms,  and  this  is  very  rarely  done. 

Most  of  the  sex  ideas  in  nouns  are  expressed  by 
"gender-equivalents" — a  name  sometimes  given  to 
the  large  class  of  words  that  denote  sex  by  the  use  of 
different  words,  instead  of  by  a  change  in  termination. 
Such  are  boy,  girl;  youth,  maiden;  cock,  hen;  uncle, 
aunt;  father,  mother;  and  most  important  of  all,  the 
singular  pronouns  of  the  third  person,  he,  she,  and  it. 
To  these  must  be  added  various  titles  that  have  sex 
signification,  and  also  the  various  compound  words 
which  are  made  to  serve  the  same  end,  as  he-goat,  she- 
goat.  The  use  of  the  personal  pronoun  with  a  noun  to 
show  gender  is  peculiar  to  English;  but  the  awkward- 
ness of  the  construction  has  led  to  its  gradual  abandon- 
ment. The  older  writers  used  it  frequently.  Such 
combinations  as  he-friend,  she-condition,  may  be  met 
with  in  the  older  English  writings.  Thus  Fuller  speaks 
of  a  she-saint,  and  she-devils,  and  Shakspeare  writes 
"  Be  brief,  my  good  she-Mercury." 


Gender  81 

Early  English  uses  many  gender-forms.  But  his- 
torical changes  have  so  modified  the  language  as  almost 
to  justify  the  sweeping  declaration  of  Richard  Grant 
White:  "There  is  no  vestige  of  gender  in  English. 
We  simply  do  not  call  a  woman  a  man,  or  a  bull  a  cow." 

Historical  grammar  shows  many  interesting  facts  of 
changes  in  English  gender.  In  old  English  masculine, 
feminine,  and  neuter  nouns  were  marked  by  different 
endings,  and  articles  and  adjectives  had  agreeing  gen- 
der forms.  Some  of  these  old  gender  nouns  have  come 
down  to  us,  but  bearing  no  longer  any  gender  distinc- 
tions. Nouns  in  dom  as  freedom,  were  originally  mas- 
culine. Ung,  nes,  (now  ing  and  ness)  were  feminine 
endings,  as  in  greeting,  goodness. 

Some  diminutives  in  en  as  maiden,  chicken  were 
neuter.  But  en  was  also  a  feminine  ending,  as  found 
to-day  in  vixen.  Ster  was  another  old  feminine  ending 
that  has  come  down  to  us  in  spinster.  Many  words 
were  formed  with  this  suffix,  as : 

Mas.  Fern. 

seamer  seamster 

baker  bakester 

brewer  brewster. 

In  the  fourteenth  century  ess  began  to  replace  ster  as 
a  feminine  suffix  and  ster  began  to  acquire  a  masculine 
signification,  as  in  huckster,  songster,  teamster,  and 
youngster.  New  feminines  were  then  formed  from 
some  of  these  words,  producing  such  hybrids  as  song- 
stress, seamstress. 

By  the  Elizabethan  period  ess  had  become  the  com- 


82  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

mon  feminine  suffix.  Most  of  the  feminines  com- 
pounded with  ess  have  now  gone  by,  one  form  being 
used  for  both  genders.  The  grammars  of  the  early 
part  of  the  nineteenth  century  give  many  such  feminine 
forms — as,  teacher  ess,  doctor  ess,  sculptress — that  are 
now  wholly  obsolete.  Even  during  the  last  generation 
the  words  authoress,  poetess  and  negress  have  fallen  into 
disuse.  Most  of  the  names  of  classes  that  are  formed 
on  mental  or  moral  qualities  have  no  gender  distinc- 
tions, as  saint,  sinner,  thief,  friend,  genius,  schemer.  In 
very  ancient  English  writings,  however,  such  words  as 
saintess,  synneress,  occur.  The  modern  practice  is  to 
ignore  the  feminine  form  whenever  sex  is  immaterial 
to  the  character  or  office  itself.  On  this  principle  such 
words  as  authoress,  postmistress,  executrix  seem  to  be 
unnecessary.  Actress  is  justified,  however,  by  the 
habit  of  engaging  women  for  women's  parts.  One 
important  part  of  the  teacher's  work  in  dealing  with 
gender  is  to  show  the  present  usage  with  regard  to  such 
words,  so  that  those  forms  and  those  only,  may  be  em- 
ployed, which  belong  to  the  reputable  usage  of  the  mod- 
ern age. 

Although  the  etymology  of  gender  includes  many 
facts  about  nouns,  the  syntax  of  gender  belongs  almost 
exclusively  to  the  three  little  pronouns  he,  she,  and  it, 
and  their  relations  to  other  words.  In  regard  to  these 
pronouns,  gender,  though  not  an  inflection,  is  an  import- 
ant "grammatical  distinction,"  denoting  the  natural 
distinction  of  sex  which  belongs  to  living  objects.  Yet 
the  neuter  pronoun  is  as  much  "a  gender"  as  the 


Gender  83 

others,  since  it  also  shows  a  grammatical  distinct!*  H 
regarding  sex.  The  word  "common"  as  applied  to 
gender — since  there  is  no  common  sex — is  omitted  from 
many  modern  grammars.  Yet  it  is  a  convenient  term 
to  apply  occasionally  to  such  words  as  cousin,  fricml, 
culprit,  etc.,  which  can  stand  as  antecedent  to  pronouns 
of  either  gender  according  to  the  application  of  tie 
word.  An  obsolete  term,  epicene,  found  in  ancient 
grammars,  was  applied  to  animal  names,  which,  while 
strictly  of  one  gender,  were  made  to  cover  both  sexes. 

The  English  language  claims  the  right  to  apply  the 
terms  he  and  she  to  inanimate  objects,  and  personifica- 
tion is  a  frequent  and  forceful  rhetorical  figure  both  in 
speech  and  writing. 

Nouns  have  a  small  share  in  the  syntax  of  gender  since 
they  require  the  pronouns  to  "hark  back"  to  them- 
selves as  antecedents  for  the  justification  of  their 
gender-forms.  This  is  as  true  of  the  nouns  which  are 
not  "gender-words"  as  of  the  others;  so  in  a  sense, 
most  nouns  may  be  said  to  be  of  the  neuter  gender. 

The  syntax  of  gender,  though  not  large,  requires 
careful  attention.     The  rule  for  the  agreement  of  the 
pronoun  with  its  antecedent  is  the  only  important  gram- 
matical rule  that  belongs  to  gender.     But  the  appli<  a- 
tions  of  this  rule  involve  some  knotty  points.      One  of 
the  chief  of  these  is  the  choice  of  pronoun  when 
singular  antecedent  applies  equally  to  the  two  sex 
Usage  in  this  case  generally  takes  the  masculine  as  tl  e 
representative    of    both.     There    are    cases,    however, 
when  the  feminine  is  used,  as  being  most  representative 


84  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

of  the  class;  as  "The  teacher  instructs  her  children." 
But  there  are  other  cases  111  which  each  pronoun  seems 
objectionable.  For  these,  common  (or  vulgar)  usage 
often  employs  the  plural  pronoun,  which  is  ungram- 
matical,  although  some  writers  have  contended  for  it 
as  the  best  that  can  be  done.  Others  have  seriously 
proposed  the  introduction  of  a  new  pronoun  to  fill  this 
"felt  want."  But  new  grammatical  words  must  be  a 
"language  growth"  and  not  a  cunning  invention. 
Some  writers  try  to  avoid  the  difficulty  by  the  use  of 
one  as  a  pronoun  that  may  have  either  gender,  but  this, 
if  often  repeated,  will  easily  become  tedious.  In  the 
sentence  "John  or  Ellen  has  lost  his  or  her  pencil," 
both  ambiguity  and  grammatical  inaccuracy  have  been 
avoided.  Yet  the  awkwardness  of  the  construction  is 
certainly  a  rhetorical  if  not  a  grammatical  fault. 

The  fact  remains  that  English,  with  all  its  virtues, 
is  not  a  perfect  language.  It  has  its  own  limitations, 
and  when  we  are  brought  face  to  face  with  them,  we 
are  constrained  to  make  a  circumlocution,  thus  avoiding 
the  point  at  issue;  or  else  "  among  several  evils  to  choose 
the  least." 


xvm 

CASE 

Case  is  the  subject,  perhaps  not  of  the  greatest  difficulty 
in  grammar,  but  of  the  greatest  confusion. — DAVENPORT 
AND  EMERSON. 

The  Finnish  language  has  fourteen  cases,  but  I  do  not 
suppose  that  it  can  do  more  or  indeed  as  much  with  its 
fourteen  as  the  Greek  is  able  to  do  with  its  five. — TRENCH. 

Case  classification  is  of  necessity  in  some  measure  arbi- 
trary, and  should  be  made  as  the  best  practicable  compromise 
of  thought  analysis  on  the  one  hand  and  of  form  analysis  on 
the  other.  In  this  view  it  seems  best  to  limit  the  English 
cases  to  four. — DAVENPORT  AND  EMERSON. 

The  objective  case  in  English  does  duty  both  for  the  ac- 
cusative and  the  dative  of  other  languages. — MASON. 

There  is  no  noun  in  our  language  which  really  has  an  ob- 
jective case.  Still,  partly  by  analogy  with  the  pronouns, 
and  partly  because  many  other  languages  related  with  Eng- 
lish and  even  the  English  itself  in  earlier  times,  do  distin- 
guish the  object  from  the  subject  in  nouns  as  well  as  in  pro- 
nouns, we  usually  speak  of  nouns  as  having  an  objective 
case. — WHITNEY. 

The  objective  of  nouns  is  not  merely  a  figment  as  regards 
the  speech  of  to-day;  it  is  something  which  the  language 
has  rejected.  It  represents  the  Egypt  from  which  we  have 
come  out.  It  is,  therefore,  not  a  harmless  fiction;  it  is  a 
harmful  falsehood. — TOLMAN. 

We  should  treat  English  as  precisely  what  it  is,  not  as  it 
would  be  if  it  were  Latin  or  any  other  language. — WHITNEY. 

85 


86  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

There  are  only  seven  words  in  the  English  language 
which  show  any  difference  between  the  nominative 
and  the  objective  case.  These  are  I,  we,  thou,  he,  she, 
they,  and  who.  When  we  remember  that  two  of  these 
are  plurals  of  another  two;  that  thou  has  only  a  limited 
or  archaic  use;  that  he  and  she  may  be  regarded  as 
gender  forms  of  the  same  pronoun;  and  still  further, 
that  the  change  from  /  to  me,  we  to  us,  etc.,  is  not  a  true 
inflection  since  it  is  not  made  by  adding  a  new  suffix 
to  a  common  root — we  are  forced  to  acknowledge  that 
the  inflection  of  case  in  English  has  a  very  limited 
extension  indeed. 

The  languages  of  the  world  differ  greatly  in  the 
number  of  their  cases.  Professor  Whitney  notes  that 
the  Scythian  tongue  had  from  fifteen  to  twenty  cases. 
The  French  language,  on  the  other  hand,  has  advanced 
even  further  than  English  in  the  rejection  of  case  forms, 
Even  the  possessive  case  of  nouns  is  lacking  and  the 
preposition  de  is  used  instead. 

Old  English  had  six  cases:  nominative,  genitive, 
dative,  vocative,  accusative,  and  instrumental  (similar 
to  the  ablative,  using  by  or  with.)  These  were  distin- 
guished by  case-endings,  and  the  definite  article  and 
adjective  had  also  a  declension  of  agreeing  case  forms. 
Case  in  those  days  was  no  trivial  matter  in  English. 

All  the  relations  that  belonged  to  these  cases  are  slill 
found  in  English  syntax.  But  the  dative  and  instru- 
mental cases  have  lost  their  case-endings  and  become 
for  the  most  part  prepositional  phrases.  The  vocative 
case  is  now  merely  the  name  of  the  person  addressed, 


Case 


87 


with  perhaps  the  interjection  O  prefixed.     Even  the 
accusative  case  is  not  distinct  from  the  nominal  i 
except  in  the  seven  little  pronouns  aforesaid. 

Ancient  grammarians,  however,  following  the  analogy 
of  the  old  English,  or  perhaps  that  of  the  Latin  gram- 
mars, contrived  to  recognize  more  cases  than  the  in- 
flectional forms  gave  evidence  of.  Thus  the  "greatly 
improved  grammar"  of  Thomas  Coar,  published  in 
London  in  1796,  had  diagrams  like  the  following. 

Declension  of  house: 

Sing.  Plu. 

Nom.  a  house.  houses. 

Gen.  of  a  house.  of  houses. 

Dat.  to  a  house.  to  houses. 

Ace.  a  house.  houses. 

Voc.  O  house.  O  houses. 

Abl.  with  a  house.  with  houses. 

Modern  grammars  have  shown  great  differences  in 
their  treatment  of  case.  Some  avoid  a  strict  definition 
of  the  term.  Thus  one  grammar  says :  "  Case  denotes 
the  relation  which  a  noun  sustains  to  other  words  in  the 
sentence,  expressed  sometimes  by  its  termination, 
and  sometimes  by  its  position." 

The  number  of  cases  given  in  different  English  text- 
books varies  all  the  way  from  zero  to  the  original  six. 
Even  the  recognition  of  the  possessive  as  a  case  of 
nouns  has  been  thought  by  some  to  be  unnecessn 
That  nouns  have  a  "possessive  form"  no  one  would 
deny,  but  the  appropriateness  of  the  word  "case" 
for  this  adjective  form  of  the  noun  is  not  universally 


88  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

conceded.  Wallis  and  some  other  grammarians  dis- 
tinctly call  the  possessive  form  of  a  noun  or  pronoun  an 
adjective.  It  is  certainly  easier  to  teach  children  the 
meaning  and  use  of  the  termination  's,  than  to  teach  the 
idea  of  case,  and  to  justify  the  term  by  its  application 
to  the  possessive. 

Many  grammarians,  following  the  analogy  of  English 
pronouns,  have  fixed  upon  three  cases  for  nouns,  not  as 
the  necessary  fact,  but  as  the  most  convenient  number. 
Thus  Goold  Brown  writes,  "  It  was  a  subject  of  dispute 
how  many  cases  a  noun  shall  be  supposed  to  have. 
Public  opinion  is  now  clear  that  it  is  expedient  to  assign 
to  English  nouns  three  cases  and  no  more." 

The  relations  which  a  noun  can  hold  must  be  fully 
studied.  But  this  is  another  subject.  These  relations 
are  many,  but  since  they  are  not  distinguished  by  dif- 
ferences in  form  the  attempt  to  define  the  case  idea  in 
connection  with  these  noun  relations  can  only  lead  to 
confusion.  The  illustrations  of  case  in  English  must 
be  drawn  mostly  from  the  pronouns. 

Personal  pronouns  have,  as  a  rule,  three  grammatical 
case-forms.  These  should  be  fully  known,  as  well  as 
the  relations  which  each  may  hold.  This  gives  a  cer- 
tain amount  of  "syntax  of  case"  which,  however, 
belongs  to  the  pronouns  rather  than  to  English  nouns. 

The  question  whether  there  can  be  any  "property" 
of  case  which  does  not  show  itself  in  the  form  of  the 
word  is  too  subtle  to  be  discussed  abstractly  with  young 
students.  In  the  sentence  "  He  gave  it  to  the  minister, — 
him  with  the  long  white  hair,"  it  will  be  seen  that  the 


Case  89 

case  of  the  appositive  pronoun  is  determined  by  the 
objective  relation  of  the  preceding  noun.     But  surli 
usage  is  rare  in  English  and  it  can  be  treated  simply  as 
a  matter  of  relationship  without  ascribing  an  "object! 
case"  to  the  noun  itself. 

To  sum  up  our  conclusions:  If  the  element  of  visible 
form  were  wholly  lacking  we  should  not  speak  of  "case" 
in  English.  The  only  cases  that  the  elementary  student 
needs  to  consider  are  the  three  case-forms  of  seven 
little  pronouns,  and  the  possessive  form  which  belongs 
to  nouns.  When  the  student  is  sufficiently  advanced 
to  deal  with  abstract  questions  and  is  familiar  with  other 
languages  in  which  case  has  a  somewhat  different 
bearing,  he  may  perhaps  profitably  discuss  the  question 
whether  case  is  (as  it  has  been  variously  defined)  an 
"inflection,"  a  "property,"  a  "relation,"  or  a  "con- 
dition;" or  whether,  as  one  grammarian  has  laboriously 
informed  us,  "Case  is  the  medium  of  distinction  u 
to  describe  by  the  relation  of  a  name  or  a  substitute 
to  other  words,  the  relation  of  an  object  or  idea  to  some 
fact  or  event,  or  of  one  object  to  another." 


XIX 

THE  POSSESSIVE  CASE 

The  Possessive  Case  is  really  another  part  of  speech.  It 
does  not  represent  the  noun  in  its  strict  use,  as  the  subject 
or  object  of  a  sentence.  It  is  purely  a  qualifying  word,  and 
makes  the  nearest  approach  to  the  Adjective,  although  we 
may  also  view  it  as  having  passed  through  the  stage  of  the 
adverb. — BAIN. 

The  s  interposition  seemed  likely  to  derive  great  assistance 
from  the  concurrence  of  the  his  construction.  To  the  popular 
feeling  the  two  genitives  were  then  identical  or  nearly  so, 
and  as  people  could  not  take  the  fuller  form  as  coming  from 
the  shorter  one,  they  naturally  supposed  the  s  to  be  a  short- 
ening of  the  his. — JESPERSEN. 

The  extreme  range  of  the  possessive  gives  rise  to  ambiguity. 
For  many  of  its  remote  extensions  the  preposition  of  is  bet- 
ter.— BAIN. 

The  "signs  of  possession"  (not  in  a  demoniacal 
but  a  grammatical  sense)  have  received  some  curious 
treatment  at  the  hands  of  writers  on  language. 

The  most  common  genitive  termination  in  old 
English  was  es,  which  was  pronounced  as  an  additional 
syllable  and  sometimes  was  written  apart  from  its  noun. 
It  belonged  at  first  to  the  singular  of  some  masculine  and 
neuter  nouns,  and  was  afterwards  extended  to  the 
feminine.  Other  forms  of  this  termination  were  as, 
usy  ys,  is,  and  simply  s. 

90 


The  Possessive  Case  91 

These  genitives  in  s  were  not  found  in  the  oldest 
English,  but  made  their  appearance  in  the  Northern 
dialects  first  and  are  due  to  Scandinavian  influence. 
These  genitive  forms  continued  down  to  the  fifteenth 
century.  As  late  as  1420  such  phrases  as  "vynes 
rootes,"  "strengthes  qualitie,"  were  used.  Later  came 
the  elision  of  the  vowel  and  the  introduction  of  the  apos- 
trophe which  marks  our  modern  possessive  case;  but 
this  sign  did  not  come  into  general  use  much  before 
the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century.  Indeed,  Lowth's 
grammar  of  1763  speaks  of  the  use  of  's  as  "a  late 
Refinement,  and  what  I  really  think  a  corrupt  custom," 
adding,  "The  genitive  case  in  my  opinion  might  be 
much  more  properly  formed  by  adding  s,  or  when  the 
Pronunciation  requires  it  es,  without  an  apostrophe." 

Before  the  's  became  established  as  the  final  form 
of  the  possessive,  some  other  experiments  were  also 
tried.  As  the  Anglo-Saxon  endings  dropped  out  of 
use  a  genitive  value  was  sometimes  given  to  a  noun 
by  simple  juxtaposition  without  any  added  termination, 
as,  Venus  beauty.  This  method  is  still  practically 
employed  to  avoid  sibilants,  though  in  the  printed  form 
we  indicate  the  possessive  character  by  an  apostrophe, 
as  "for  righteousness'  sake,"  "Moses'  law,"  "boys' 
hats."  Thus  the  Bible  of  1611  had  "Mars  Hill/' 
while  later  editions  have  "Mars'  Hill." 

Another  way  of  indicating  possession  that  came  into 
frequent  use,  was  by  placing  the  pronoun  his 
after  the  noun.  Thus  Shakespeare  has  "  Mars  his  guan  1  - 
let."  A  similar  idiom  is  found  in  other  languages, 


92  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

though  in  English  the  usage  may  have  been  strengthened 
by  its  similarity  to  the  original  genitive  termination  when 
written  apart  from  its  noun,  as  in  the  line: 

"And  preysed  Reynard  is  (his)  wysdom." 

The  use  of  his  after  the  noun  appeared  in  early 
printed  literature  and  continued  for  several  hundred 
years.  The  older  English  literature  abounds  in  such 
phrases  as,  "the  egle  hys  nest."  In  the  eighteenth 
century  it  was  a  common  practice  for  the  owner  of  a 
book  to  write  his  name  upon  the  fly-leaf  thus,  "John 
Smith,  his  book."  A  well-known  example  of  this  use 
of  the  pronoun  occurred  in  the  English  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer,  in  which  the  last  phrase  of  the  Prayer  for 
all  Conditions  of  Men  was  formerly  printed  "for  Jesus 
Christ  his  sake." 

From  the  time  of  Ben  Jonson  to  that  of  Addison, 
the  theory  prevailed  that  the  *s  (which  was  also  in  use) 
was  a  contraction  of  his.  Ben  Jonson  did  not  himself 
favor  the  theory,  but  declared  in  his  grammar  that  the 
idea  that  's  was  a  contraction  of  his  would  be  "mon- 
strous syntax."  But  the  idea  seems  to  have  taken  deep 
root,  and  has  even  been  repeated  in  modern  text-books. 

Although  the  Anglo-Saxon  genitive  in  s  belonged 
only  to  singular  nouns,  modern  usage  has  established  's 
as  the  plural  possessive  termination  also,  with  the 
apostrophe  alone  when  the  plural  already  ends  in  s. 
A  rule  at  one  time  crept  into  the  grammars  for  the 
placing  of  the  apostrophe  after  the  s  as  a  means  of  dis- 
tinguishing the  plural  possessive  from  the  singular  in 


The  Possessive  Case  93 

nouns  whose  singular  and  plural  are  alike,  as  "a  sheep's 
tail,"  "four  sheeps'  tails."  But  this  is  not  sustained 
either  by  modern  usage  or  by  historical  reason.  When 
there  is  danger  of  ambiguity  it  can  be  avoided  by  the  use 
of  a  prepositional  phrase. 

Since  's  is  the  modern  possessive  termination,  it  is 
well  that  the  exceptions  to  the  rule  should  be  as  few 
as  possible.  Usage  is  not  entirely  uniform  on  the 
question  of  adding  9s  to  a  singular  noun  that  already 
ends  in  s.  But  the  general  practice  and  tendency  seems 
to  be  wholly  in  favor  of  the  regular  termination.  There 
is  usually  no  difficulty  for  either  the  ear  or  the  eye  in 
adding  9s  to  a  noun  ending  in  s,  though  it  must  usually 
be  pronounced  as  a  separate  syllable,  as  James's  hat, 
Thomas's  baU. 

The  possessive  sign  is  seldom  added  to  names  other 
than  those  of  persons.  A  few  special  combinations  have 
become  in  a  measure  stereotyped  as  "a  day's  work," 
"the  sun's  rays,"  "life's  end,"  etc.  Modern  journal- 
istic writers  are  also  fond  of  adding  the  termination 
to  the  names  of  places,  as  "New  York's  new  mayor," 
"Boston's  grain  shipments."  Such  expressions  are 
concise  and  vigorous  but  are  generally  avoided  in  prose 
literary  writings. 

The  possessive  sign  is  sometimes  added  to  a  phrase 
instead  of  to  a  single  noun,  as  "Longfellow  the  po< 
home."  An  ambiguity  that  may  arise  from  such  usage 
is  suggested  by  the  old  conundrum, "  Since  Moses  was 
the  son  of  Pharaoh's  daughter,  he  was  the  daughter  of 
Pharaoh's  son,  wasn't  he?" 


94  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

In  certain  English  dialects  the  practice  of  making  a 
whole  phrase  possessive  has  been  carried  very  far,  as  in 
the  following  attributed  to  Somersetshire:  "That's 
the  woman-what-was-left-behind's  child."  Occasion- 
ally both  a  noun  and  its  appositive  have  received  the 
possessive  sign,  as  "We  left  the  card  in  Mr.  Gary's, 
the  secretary's,  hand."  There  are  also  instances  in  lit- 
erature where  an  uninflected  noun  is  made  an  apposi- 
tive to  a  noun  with  the  possessive  termination,  as, 

"Othello's  pleasure,  our  noble  and  valiant  general." 

In  phrases  containing  the  adjective  else,  usage  has 
varied  in  regard  to  the  possessive  sign,  as, 

They  were  more  in  Pendennis's  way  than  in  anybody's 
else. — THACKERAY. 

I  took  somebody  else's  hat. — DICKENS. 

On  the  whole,  the  weight  of  usage  seems  to  be  in 
favor  of  "anybody  else's,"  though  the  position  in  the 
sentence,  (whether  at  the  end  or  not),  and  euphony, 
seem  to  have  some  effect  in  the  decision.  In  ques- 
tions the  preferred  form  is  "whose  else?"  Yet  here, 
also,  usage  varies,  as 

Whose  else's  do  you  think? — DICKENS. 

Yes,  who  else's  daughter  should  I  be? — GOSSE  (TRANSLATE 
ING  FROM  IBSEN). 

The  distinctions  of  joint  and  separate  ownership  in 
the  use  of  the  possessive  sign  may  be  learned  by  the 
comparison  of  such  phrases  as, 


The  Possessive  Case  95 

Reed  and  Brown's  Grammar. 
Reed  and  Brown's  Grammars. 
Reed's  and  Brown's  Grammar. 
Reed's  and  Brown's  Grammars. 

An  element  of  confusion  for  possessive  forms  is  made 
by  the  occasional  use  of  9s  as  a  plural  termination  for 
letters,  signs,  and  the  names  of  words,  when  the  addi- 
tion of  s  alone  would  give  ambiguity,  as,  "There  are 
two  1's  in  skill,"  "There  are  four  Ye's  and  three  We's 
on  the  page."  But  if  such  exceptional  plural  forms 
be  allowed  they  should  be  made  as  few  as  possible.  In 
the  last  century  the  forms  of  the  genitives  and  the 
plurals  wrere  often  confounded.  Thus  Addison  in  the 
Spectator  wrote  of  "Purcell's  Opera's." 

The  possessives  of  the  personal  pronouns  never  con- 
tain an  apostrophe  but  represent  other  types  of  the  old 
Saxon  inflections.  (See  chapter  on  Personal  Pro- 
nouns.) 

In  addition  to  the  possessive  forms  of  nouns  and 
personal  pronouns,  English  has  one  other  word  in  the 
possessive  case.  Whose  is  the  possessive  of  who  both 
as  a  relative  and  an  interrogative,  and  is  occasionally 
used  also  as  a  possessive  for  which,  especially  in  poetry. 

The  old  genitive  case  covered  some  word  relations 
that  do  not  belong  to  the  modern  possessive  case,  and 
that  are  usually  expressed  in  modern  English  by  the 
preposition  o/,  as,  "The  siege  of  Paris."  The  substi- 
tution of  these  phrases  for  the  older  genitive  is  due  to 
French  influence.  In  some  similar  cases  where  the 
possessive  is  allowable  there  may  be  ambiguity  of  mean- 


96  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

ing.  Thus  the  phrase,  "My  brother's  picture,"  may 
mean  a  picture  belonging  to  my  brother,  or  one  that 
represents  him.  Although  usage  allows  this  phrase 
with  either  meaning,  yet  in  general  it  seems  desirable 
to  limit  the  possessive  to  the  idea  of  ownership  and  to 
use  of  in  other  cases.  Thus  "  The  roar  of  the  waves," 
is  better  in  prose  than  "The  wave's  roar,"  although  in 
poetry  the  latter  form  is  sometimes  used. 

An  idiom  in  English  that  is  peculiar  and  sometimes 
difficult  to  explain  is  the  use  of  the  possessive  case  in 
an  objective  relation  after  of,  thus  making  a  double 
or  cumulative  genitive  form.  In  the  phrase  "This 
book  of  John's"  the  simple  and  natural  meaning  is 
"one  of  several  which  he  owns."  Yet  usage  allows  the 
same  form  in  cases  where  there  may  be  only  one,  as, 
"This  child  of  ours  is  ill,"  "He  is  a  servant  of  the 
General's."  In  the  expression:  "A  Discovery  of  Sir 
Isaac  Newton's,"  the  use  of  the  possessive  makes  the 
idea  subjective,  that  is,  the  discovery  was  by  him.  If 
the  simple  (or  nominative)  noun  form  were  used  it 
would  be  Newton  himself  that  was  discovered. 

There  has  been  much  grammatical  history  connected 
with  the  possessive  case.  An  English  writer  (Mr. 
Serjeant  Manning)  has  written  an  entire  pamphlet  on 
this  subject  under  the  elaborate  title,  "The  Character 
and  Origin  of  the  Possessive  Augment  in  English  and  its 
Cognate  Dialects," 


XX 

COMPARISON 

We  should  hold  apart  true  comparison  of  adjectives  and 
the  mere  combination  of  adjective  and  adverb. — WHITNEY 

The  rule  requiring  the  comparative  where  two  objects 
are  compared  is  strictly  true  for  Latin  but  not  for  English. — 
ALLEN. 

The  inflection  of  comparison  belongs  to  some  adjec- 
tives of  quality  and  to  a  few  adverbs.  The  forms  are 
three  in  number  and  are  called  "degrees,"  though  one 
or  two  modern  grammars  object  to  that  term  and  prefer 
simply  the  word  "forms,"  which  indeed  seems  to  cover 
all  real  needs. 

These  forms  or  "degrees"  are  said  to  express  degrees 
of  quality,  but  must  not  be  supposed  to  do  so  in  any 
absolute  way.  The  comparative  simply  shows  that  one 
of  two  objects  compared  has  more  of  the  quality  than 
the  other.  It  does  not  show  "  more  of  the  quality  than 
the  positive"  as  many  grammars  have  stated.  Indeed, 
in  more  than  half  the  cases  where  the  comparative  is 
used,  the  quality  is  not  present  in  a  very  marked  < 
while  there  must  be  a  prominent  and  positive  quality 
to  justify  the  use  of  the  positive  form  of  the  adjective. 
I  may  say  "  John  is  taller  than  James,"  when  neither  of 
them  could  be  called  tall. 

In  a  similar  way  the  superlative  does  not  show  "  the 

97 


98  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

greatest  degree  of  the  quality,"  but  only  the  greatest 
to  be  found  in  the  group  of  objects  that  are  compared. 
Even  when  we  use  the  positive  degree  there  is  a  subtle 
comparison  of  the  object  with  an  assumed  average  that 
is  held  in  mind  as  the  standard.  If  I  say  "These  are 
large  apples,"  I  mean  that  they  are  relatively  large  as 
compared  with  the  average  apple. 

The  comparative  form  is  exclusive,  separating  the 
objects  compared,  and  is  usually  followed  by  than. 
The  superlative  is  inclusive,  and  is  usually  followed  by 
of.  The  superlative  may  be  correctly  used  in  the  com- 
parison of  two  objects  when  these  constitute  an  entire 
class. 

Terms  of  approximate  comparison  are  sometimes 
used  in  English  as  "rounder,"  "more  perfect."  The 
idiom  rests  on  a  lower  conception  of  the  quality  named, 
and  is  equivalent  to  "more  nearly  round,"  "more 
nearly  perfect."  The  phrase  "My  Dearest  Mother" 
has  in  it  an  absolute  superlative  without  any  real 
comparison. 

With  long  adjectives  the  adverbs  more  and  most  take 
the  place  of  the  inflectional  forms  of  comparison;  and 
with  long  and  short  adjectives  alike,  less  and  least  are 
often  used  to  express  a  negative  kind  of  comparison. 
A  whole  phrase  may  sometimes  be  treated  to  such 
modification,  as  "This  is  more  to  my  mind  than  that." 
Very,  exceedingly,  rather,  highly,  and  other  adverbs 
are  frequently  employed  to  denote  degrees  of  quality, 
but  in  these  cases  there  is  no  such  specific  comparison 
as  is  expressed  by  the  comparative  and  superlative 


Comparison  <jy 

forms.  To  add  an  adverb  (even  more  or  most)  to  an 
adjective  is  not  truly  an  inflection  of  comparison, 
though  more  and  most  perform  the  same  office  as  the 
terminations  of  comparison. 

The  use  of  more  and  most  as  a  substitute  for  the 
terminations  er  and  est  came  into  use  toward  the  end 
of  the  thirteenth  century  and  is  due  to  Norman- 
French  influence.  Chaucer  frequently  uses  such  forms 
as  wofuller,  fittingest.  In  the  Elizabethan  period,  and 
even  later,  writers  paid  little  attention  to  the  length 
of  the  adjective  in  determining  the  mode  of  comparison. 
Thus  Milton  has  hopefullest;  Goldsmith,  cunninger 
and  cruelest;  and  even  Washington  Irving  uses  know- 
ingest.  Such  sentences  as  "The  delectablest  lusty 
sight  and  movingest  object  methought  it  was, "  are  found 
in  early  English  literature. 

Double  forms  of  comparison  were  also  used  by  the 
older  writers.  Thus  the  Bible  has  "most  straitest 
sect." 

In  Shakespeare  we  read: 

A  more  longer  list  of  virtues. — ANTONY  AND  CLEOPATRA. 
Thy  most  worst. — WINTER'S  TALE. 

The  more  better  assurance.  —  MIDSUMMER  NIGHT'S 
DREAM. 

Ben  Jonson  speaks  of  this  usage  as  "  a  certain  kind  of 
English  Atticism  imitating  the  manner  of  the  most  an- 
cientest  and  finest  Grecians." 

In  such  expressions,  more  and  most  seem  to  have 
been  first  added  to  intensify  the  force  of  er  and  est. 


100  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Later  they  came  to  take  the  place  of  er  and  est  for  long 
adjectives. 

In  this  connection  we  may  notice  the  anomalous 
phrase  "less  happier  land,"  used  by  Shakespeare  in 
King  Richard  II,  and  also  Milton's  interesting  line, 

"And  in  the  lowest  depths  a  lower  deep." 

Most  of  the  so-called  irregular  comparisons  are 
merely  isolated  adjective  forms  which  have  lost  their 
associated  degrees  of  comparison.  Thus,  better  and 
best  had  an  ancient  positive,  bat;  worse  and  worst 
had  a  root  adjective  weor,  meaning  bad.  Hinder, 
netJier,  after,  over,  either,  and  other  words  are  ancient 
comparative  forms,  from  which  the  other  degrees  have 
been  lost.  Inner,  upper,  farther  and  some  others  have 
in  present  usage  only  an  adverb,  instead  of  an  adjective, 
for  the  positive  degree. 

Among  the  irregular  forms  of  comparison  there  are  a 
few  that  show  traces  of  vowel  modification,  and  since 
regular  forms  are  also  in  use  paronyms  have  been  de- 
veloped, as  elder,  older;  latter,  later;  last,  latest.  Of 
these  the  irregular  form  is  always  the  earlier. 

There  is  much  interesting  word  study  that  can  be 
undertaken  in  connection  with  the  irregular  forms  of 
comparison,  but  this  belongs  to  general  etymological 
study  rather  than  to  the  subject  of  true  grammatical 
inflection. 


XXI 

VOICE 

Grammatical  terms  are  conventional  and  often  unsatis- 
factory.— TOLMAN. 

The  absence  of  a  reflexive  is  one  reason  why  English  has 
never  developed  a  passive  voice  for  any  of  its  verbs. — 
RAMSEY. 

The  change  of  the  verb  for  voice  consists  in  the  invention 
of  a  Passive  variation  of  the  verb,  for  stating  the  same  action 
in  a  different  form.  To  repeat  all  the  tenses  and  moods  of 
the  verb,  under  a  different  termination,  merely  to  exhibit  a 
difference  such  as  this,  seems  a  great  waste  of  power. — BAIN. 

Voice  is  that  form  of  a  verb  which  shows  whether  the 
subject  represents  the  actor  or  the  one  who  receives  the 
act.  Exactly  why  the  name  voice  should  be  given  to 
this  property  of  the  verb  it  is  hard  to  say.  But  it  can  be 
treated  as  a  recognized  term  in  grammar,  in  spite  of  its 
apparent  lack  of  etymological  meaning. 

There  is,  however,  no  real  inflection  of  voice  in 
English,  since  all  the  passive  verb  forms  are  phrases 
made  by  the  past  participle  of  the  verb  with  the  various 
forms  of  be.  For  this  reason  some  grammarians  omit 
the  term  voice  entirely.  But  since  other  languages 
have  voice,  grammarians  have  usually  felt  that  it  is  con- 
venient to  retain  the  idea  in  English  also,  and  to  treat 
these  passive  phrases  as  a  voice  inflection  of  the  verb. 

101 


10$'  ' l  '(Shratoitiiar  and  Its  Reasons 

The  object  of  the  active  voice  is  made  the  subject  of 
the  passive.  Where  there  are  two  objects,  one  direct 
and  the  other  indirect,  the  direct  object  is  the  natural 
subject  of  the  passive  and  the  indirect  object  remains 
in  the  passive  voice  as  an  indirect  objective  phrase,  as, 
"  He  gave  me  some  oranges."  Some  oranges  were 
given  to  me.  Yet  occasionally  we  find  the  indirect 
object  becoming  the  subject  and  the  direct  object  re- 
maining over  in  the  passive,  and  known  as  the  "  re- 
tained object,"  as  "  I  was  given  some  oranges."  This 
construction  is  peculiar  to  the  English  tongue. 

In  the  case  of  an  attributive  object  following  the 
direct  object  (a  construction  sometimes  called  the 
objective  predicate  or  factitive  object)  it  is  the  habit 
of  the  passive  to  make  the  direct  part  of  the  object  the 
subject,  using  the  following  word  or  phrase  as  an  at- 
tribute after  the  copulative  verb  phrase,  as 

They  made  her  queen. 
She  was  made  queen. 

Only  transitive  verbs  have  a  passive  voice.  There  is 
a  large  class  of  neuter  or  intransitive  verbs  that  have  no 
change  of  voice,  and  their  forms  are  necessarily  all 
active. 

Even  in  the  transitive  verbs  the  passive  forms  are 
used  far  less  than  the  active.  Simple  and  illiterate 
people,  as  well  as  children,  seldom  use  passive  verbs, 
because  their  thought  seldom  takes  the  passive  form. 

An  intransitive  verb  followed  by  a  preposition  is 


Voice  103 

sometimes  thought  of  as  a  transitive  verb,  and  UK  11 
forms  a  passive,  as 

He  was  taken  no  notice  of. 
Such  means  were  resorted  to. 

There  are  some  intransitive  phrases  that  resoml»l<* 
the  passive  in  form,  as  "He  is  come,"  "The  tower  is 
fallen."  The  participle  in  these  cases  is  sometimes 
treated  like  an  adjective  rather  than  as  a  part  of  a  true 
verb  phrase.  This  construction  is  very  common  in 
Shakespearian  English.  We  read: 

"The  King  himself  is  rode  to  view  the  battle." — KINO 
HENRY  VIII. 

"I  am  declined  into  the  vale  of  years." — OTHELLO. 
"His  lordship  is  walked  forth." — KING  HENRY  IV. 

Although  these  intransitive  phrases  resemble  the 
passive  voice  they  really  conform  to  the  grammar  of 
old  English  in  which  be  was  the  auxiliary  of  the  perfect 
tenses  for  the  intransitive  verbs,  and  have  for  the  transi- 
tive verbs.  In  modern  English  the  transitive  auxiliary 
have  has  become  the  perfect  tense  auxiliary  for  all 
verbs. 

There  are  cases  in  which  active  verb  seems  to  have 
a  passive  meaning,  as  "Meat  will  not  keep  in  hot 
weather." 

This  also  was  more  common  in  earlier  literature,  as 

"What's  to  do>" — TWELFTH  NIGHT. 

To  the  student  of  general  grammar  both  of  these  con- 
structions suggest  the  so-called  "middle  voice"  of 


104  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Greek  and  some  other  languages,  used  sometimes  in 
sentences  which  in  modern  English  would  have  an 
active  verb  with  a  reflexive  object.  Thus  "The  book 
sells  well"  seems  to  have  come  from  a  reflexive  form 
"sells  itself." 

In  the  older  English  reflexives  were  commonly  used 
when  the  actor  was  unknown,  as  "The  door  opens 
itself."  Later  the  reflexive  form  was  changed  to  the 
passive.  Thus : 

Collect  yourself — be  collected. 
Prepare  yourself — be  prepared. 

"I  persuade  myself"  is  much  like  "I  let  myself  be  per- 
suaded" (middle  voice).  But  "I  persuade  myself" 
and  "I  am  persuaded"  also  mean  nearly  the  same 
thing.  "I  am  persuaded"  may  sometimes  be  a  true 
passive,  though  it  usually  has  a  merely  intransitive 
sense  in  which  the  subject  is  not  thought  of  either  as 
representing  an  actor  or  one  acted  upon. 

From  the  comparison  of  such  sentences  as  the  fore- 
going it  will  be  seen  that  intransitive,  reflexive,  and 
passive  verbs  have  close  relations  to  each  other.  His- 
torically passive  verbs  seem  to  have  developed  out  of  a 
kind  of  "middle  voice"  which  was  closely  allied  to  the 
old  reflexive  forms.  Latin  has  the  remains  of  a  kind  of 
"middle  voice"  in  the  deponent  verbs  which  unite  a 
passive  form  with  an  active  meaning.  To  the  student 
of  advanced  grammar  such  comparisons  of  the  English 
idioms  with  the  constructions  of  other  languages  are 
most  helpful. 


Voice  105 

Get  is  occasionally  used  as  an  auxiliary  in  English  in 
such  a  way  as  to  bring  the  activity  of  others  to  the  front, 
as  "  You  will  get  punished. "  "  He  got  himself  elr< -t <  •<  1 . " 
Such  expressions  belong  to  colloquial  idiom  but  ;m- 
seldom  met  with  in  literary  English.  They  might  be 
thought  of  as  a  kind  of  "middle  voice"  if  it  were  Worth 
while  to  adopt  such  a  classification  in  English.  It  is 
better,  however,  to  avoid  needless  classification  and 
keep  our  grammatical  nomenclature  more  simple. 

Progressive  verb  phrases  belong  mostly  to  the  active 
voice  of  the  verb;  yet  the  idea  of  continuous  action  is 
not  wholly  foreign  to  the  passive.  To  express  this  the 
older  writers  used  an  active  form  with  a  passive  mean- 
ing, as,  "The  house  is  building,"  which  was  perhaps 
a  modification  of  the  more  strictly  grammatical  form 
of  old  English,  "The  house  is  a-building."  The 
apparent  incongruity  in  such  phrases  is  increased  by 
the  fact  that  they  cannot  be  used  with  all  verbs.  We 
cannot  say  for  instance,  "The  boy  is  whipping,"  with 
a  passive  meaning;  although  Bolingbroke  once  wrote, 
"The  crime,  which  was  committing,  etc." 

In  recent  times  a  new  progressive  passive  phrase  has 
come  into  use,  such  as  "  is  being  built,"  "  is  being  don 
The  earliest  known  instance  of  the  use  of  "is  }»nn^ 
built"  is  found  in  a  letter  by  Southey  dated  1 7f).>.  But 
this  form  of  phrase  is  open  to  other  objections  lx  -idrs 
that  of  its  recent  origin.  In  the  sentence  "  The  house, 
being  built  of  stone,  is  cold  and  damp,"  the  phrase 
"being  built"  signifies  that  the  house  is  "done  built," 
rather  than  in  a  continuous  building  state.  But  the 


106  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

chief  objection  that  has  been  raised  to  "is  being  built'* 
is  that  is  is  made  an  auxiliary  to  its  own  participle  being. 
Outside  the  present  and  past  tenses  also,  this  con- 
struction never  occurs.  "The  house  had  been  being 
built  for  ten  years"  would  be  intolerable.  In  spite 
of  these  objections,  however,  "is  being  done"  and 
other  like  phrases  seem  to  be  fairly  good  English  and 
have  evidently  come  to  stay.  They  are  displacing  the 
older  form  "is  building."  Yet  this  is  not  obsolete  and 
when  it  can  be  used  without  confusion,  it  is  preferred 
by  many  writers  as  being  less  clumsy  and  more  forcible, 
and  also  as  having  the  sanction  of  long-continued  and 
classic  English  usage.  No  new  phrases  like  "is  build- 
ing," however,  seem  likely  to  come  into  the  language, 
while  the  other  form  is  extending  its  use  to  other  verbs 
as  well. 

Although  the  passive  voice  is  no  true  inflection  of 
English  the  passive  verb  phrases  give  an  important  varia- 
tion to  sentence  forms.  The  conveniences  of  the  pas- 
sive voice  are  these:  The  agent  may  be  unknown  so 
that  the  active  voice  cannot  be  used  except  with  an  in- 
definite subject,  as  "  Some  one  has  broken  the  window"; 
that  is,  "The  window  has  been  broken."  The  passive 
voice  also  makes  the  object  emphatic  by  putting  it  in  a 
leading  place.  Sometimes  the  interest  is  entirely  con- 
fined to  the  object,  the  agent  being  unimportant,  as 
"The  church  was  burned  to  the  ground."  Merely  as 
an  alternative  form,  also,  the  passive  phrase  sometimes 
gives  a  pleasing  variety  to  sentence  constructions. 


XXII 
MOOD 

I  have  met  with  no  satisfactory  definition  of  Mood  or 
Mode  in  Grammar  and  am  unable  to  give  one. — RAMSEY. 

"Mood  gives  one  the  color  of  thought  that  the  speaker 
desires  to  create.  Sentences  have  moods  because  people 
have  moods." 

There  are  infinite  shades  of  doubt  and  contingency,  of 
hope,  and  fear. — WHITNEY. 

Mood  is  the  change  in  the  simple  assertive  form  of  the 
verb  to  express  degree  of  certainty  or  doubt.  The  indica- 
tive is  really  no  mood  at  all.  Moods  are  changes  from  the 
unmodified  form  of  assertion. — BROWN  AND  DEGARMO. 

The  imperative  and  subjunctive  have  no  forms  not  found 
in  the  indicative. — HARPER  AND  BURGESS. 

The  enumeration  of  the  so-called  compound  tenses  amongst 
the  tenses  proper  is  due  to  a  confusion  between  logic  and 
grammar,  only  slightly  removed  from  the  fiction  which  gave 
us  the  still  lingering  potential  mood  (I  can  write)  or  which 
might  with  equal  correctness  have  given  us  an  obligatory 
mood  (I  must  write),  a  desiderative  mood  (I  like  to  write), 
an  obstinate  mood  (I  am  determined  to  write),  etc. — STRONG, 

LOGEMAN,    AND    WHEELER. 

Mood,  or  mode,  as  it  is  sometimes  called,  is  the  change 
of  form  in  a  verb  to  show  different  ways  in  which  the 
assertion  is  made;  that  is,  as  expressing  a  fact,  a  poOSF 
bility,  a  command,  the  condition  of  another  event,  etc. 
It  is  a  property  of  the  verb  that  must  be  recognized  even 

107 


108  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

though  it  has  so  little  of  the  inflectional  character  that 
in  defining  the  term  it  is  not  easy  to  find  clear  illustra- 
tions that  can  show  the  real  character  of  mood  in 
English  verbs.  A  comparison  of  the  sentences  "He 
was  here,"  and  "If  he  were  here  he  would  do  it,"  gives 
an  idea  of  difference  between  the  indicative  and  sub- 
junetive  moods.  Again,  the  sentences  "Thou  goest," 
and  "Go  thou,"  illustrate  a  difference  between  the  in- 
dicative and  imperative  moods. 

The  subjunctive  and  imperative  are  not  really  dis- 
tinct inflectional  forms.  They  are,  howver,  modifica- 
tions of  the  assertive  form  that  require  explanation. 

The  verb  be  has  more  of  mood  than  any  other  verb : 
yet  even  in  this,  the  most  important  and  irregular  of  all 
verbs,  the  modal  inflection  is  slight. 

The  right  classification  of  moods  is  by  no  means 
universally  agreed  upon.  Some  ancient  grammarians 
reckoned  as  many  as  ten  different  moods.  A  few 
years  ago  five  moods  were  usually  named  in  English 
grammars, — the  indicative,  potential,  subjunctive,  im- 
perative, and  infinitive  moods.  Some  grammarians 
added  a  sixth  mood,  would  and  should  being  separated 
from  other  potential  auxiliaries  as  the  distinguishing 
marks  of  a  "conditional  mood."  The  optative  mood, 
or  "mood  of  wishing"  has  sometimes  been  recognized, 
'May  you  be  happy."  A  few  grammarians  have  car- 
ried the  classification  of  moods  further  still;  and 
elective,  determinative,  compulsive,  obligatory,  re- 
guisitive  and  vocative  are  all  names  which  have  been 
applied  to  moods  of  verbs. 


Mood  109 

The  infinitive  no  longer  has  any  standing  as  a  modal 
form  of  the  verb.  Instead  of  showing  the  "  manner  of 
the  assertion"  it  makes  no  assertion  and  is  a  verbal 
noun. 

The  potential  mood  is  also  omitted  from  most  modern 
grammars.     The  forms  are  not  made  by  inflection  and 
they    have    varied    uses.     The    potential    auxiliar 
however,  need  careful  study  in  regard  to  their  peculiari- 
ties of  meaning  and  use.     This  is  a  difficult  task  for 
foreign  students  of  English  and  it  affords  a  large  field 
for  study  even  with  the  native-born  among  Engli 
speaking  peoples.     The  potential  forms  may  be  dealt 
with  simply  as  a  class  of  phrases  similarly  formed  rather 
than  as  a  true  mood  of  the  English  verb. 

The  subjunctive  mood  fills  less  space  in  the  grammars 
than  formerly,  since  subjunctive  forms  are  less  used 
and  the  indicative  form  with  a  conjunction  of  doubt 
prefixed  is  no  longer  called  subjunctive.  Modern 
grammars  clearly  recognize  that  the  essence  of  the 
subjunctive  mood  lies  in  the  verb  itself  rather  than 
in  the  accompanying  conjunction.  The  few  facts  of  i 
subjunctive  that  are  left  in  English  grammar  are  of  much 
interest  and  importance,  however,  and  must  be  care- 
fully treated  by  grammarians. 

The  imperative  mood  is  said  to  be  the  form  of  11  ic 
verb  used  in  a  command.  But  if  we  compare  the  sen' 
tences 

Present  arms. 

Pass  me  the  bread,  please. 

Give  us  this  day  our  daily  bread. 


110  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

we  see  that  from  a  superior  to  an  inferior  the  impera- 
tive expresses  a  command ;  between  equals  it  denotes  a 
simple  request;  and  when  used  from  an  inferior  to  a 
superior,  or  in  man's  address  to  God,  it  becomes  the 
language  of  supplication  and  prayer.  We  also  see  that 
the  imperative  mood  is  characterized  rather  by  the 
absence  of  inflection  than  by  any  positive  inflectional 
element.  It  is  simply  the  common  form  of  the  verb 
used  as  a  sentence  word  as,  "Come,"  "Try."  By  im- 
plication the  second  person  is  its  subject  but  the  verb 
seems  independent  of  any  sentence  agreements. 

The  dividing  line  between  the  imperative  and  some 
of  the  other  modal  forms  is  hard  to  draw.  Verb  phrases 
with  let  as  "Let  me  go,"  are  sometimes  classed  with 
imperatives,  sometimes  with  potential  forms.  The 
subjunctive  of  desire  as  "Long  live  the  king"  has  an 
affinity  with  the  imperative.  Shall  as  a  modal  aux- 
iliary has  an  imperative  meaning.  The  question 
whether  the  Ten  Commandments  are  in  the  imperative 
mood  has  been  argued.  But  most  grammarians  limit 
the  imperative  mood  to  the  formal  imperative  sentence, 
as  "Bring  me  the  book." 

The  classification  of  moods  in  English,  as  has  been 
seen,  is  in  a  degree  arbitrary.  Some  modern  gram- 
marians have  proposed  to  reduce  all  moods  to  two, 
the  Objective  (corresponding  to  the  indicative)  which 
deals  with  events  as  outside  the  speaker's  own  person- 
ality; and  the  Subjective  (including  the  potential, 
subjunctive  and  imperative)  which  shows  the  relation 
of  the  speaker's  own  mind  to  the  thought  expressed. 


Mood  111 

It  seems  to  be  true  that  most  of  the  facts  of  modal 
inflection  are  covered  in  English  when  a  clear  <li 
tion   is  drawn      between   the   "fact  forms"  and    the 
"thought  forms"  of  the  verb. 

The  potential  and  subjunctive  forms  are  of  L 
interest  to  students  of  English  arid  will  be  disci  i 
further.  (See  Chapters  36  and  38.) 


XXIII 

TENSE 

The  grammatical  tenses  correspond  very  incompletely 
with  the  logical  distinctions. — STRONG,  LOGEMAN,  AND 
WHEELER. 

Some  grammarians  put  in  their  conjugations  what  they 
call  the  compound  tenses,  as  "I  have  worked,"  "shall  have 
worked,"  and  so  on.  But  this  can  only  serve  to  fill  up  a 
book,  for  all  these  consist  merely  in  the  introduction  of  the 
use  of  the  verb  to  have  in  its  various  parts. — COBBETT'S 
GRAMMAR,  1818. 

Certain  cheap  and  facile  novelists  write  habitually  in  the 
present  tense  and  have  won  for  this  the  name  of  hysterical 
present. — ARLO  BATES. 

Any  reader  acquainted  with  a  foreign  language  knows 
how  much  care  is  requisite  in  translating  the  various  Eng- 
lish tenses  in  their  different  applications. — STRONG,  LOGE- 
MAN, AND  WHEELER. 

Tense  may  be  loosely  defined  as  the  verbal  form  that 
shows  time,  and  sometimes  also  the  completeness  or 
incompleteness  of  an  event.  Yet  the  only  true  tense 
inflection  of  the  verb  is  the  change  from  the  present 
to  the  past  tense.  Future  time  is  expressed  by  a  phrase, 
and  not  by  an  inflection.  There  are  other  verb  phrases 
which  by  means  of  the  auxiliary  have  give  the  idea  of 
finished  action,  and  these  are  sometimes  called  the 
perfect  or  compound  tenses.  The  six  tenses  commonly 
named  are, 

112 


Tense 

present,  present  perfect, 

past,  past  perfect, 

future,  future  perfect. 

The  perfect  tenses  express  the  completion  of  an  action 
or  event  relatively  to  the  time  of  some  other  event  and 
are  therefore  relative  tenses.  The  present  perfect 
represents  the  action  as  finished  within  the  unit  of  time 
taken  as  the  present,  and  before  the  actual  present,  as 
"I  have  written  three  letters  this  morning."  The  past 
perfect  and  the  future  perfect  represent  the  action  as 
completed  in  past  or  future  time,  and  before  some 
specified  past  or  future  event,  as  "  I  had  written  it  i 
fore  he  came,"  "  I  shall  have  finished  it  before  to-morrc  A\ 
noon."  The  future  perfect,  however,  is  cumbrous  in 
its  form  and  not  often  to  be  used. 

The  future  and  future  perfect  are  sometimes  called 
the  first  and  second  future,  and  some  grammarians  <: 
to  the  past  perfect  the  mysterious  name  of  pluperi 
(i.  e.  more  than  perfect)  tense. 

To  distinguish  it  from  the  perfect  tenses  the  past  tense 
is  sometimes  called  the  imperfect  past,  or  simply  the 
imperfect  tense;  although  it  may  be  said  that  the 
present,  past,  and  future  are  all  imperfect  tenses. 
By  some  grammarians  also  the  past  tense  is  called 
preterit,  a  term  which  is  intended  to  convey  the 
idea  of  wholly  past.  The  name  preterit,  how- 
ever, has  sometimes  been  applied  to  the  present  perf  < 
instead  of  the  past. 

Some  of  the  reasons  for  these  varied  and  confu 
names  may  be  learned  by  the  study  of  general  and 


114  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

comparative  grammar.  The  past  tense  in  English 
is  an  indefinite  tense,  a  mere  past,  and  may  denote 
either  a  continuing  or  a  momentary  action,  as,  "He 
lived  by  the  river/'  "He  fell  down."  Some  languages, 
however,  have  differing  tense  forms  for  these  two 
idioms.  The  Greek  denotes  momentary  past  action 
by  a  form  called  the  aorist,  in  distinction  from  the 
imperfect  past;  but  the  Teutonic  languages  do  not 
make  this  clear  distinction  between  the  imperfect 
past  and  the  finished  past. 

The  perfect  tenses  in  English  also  have  somewhat  of 
the  same  indefinite  application,  and  can  be  either 
complete  or  incomplete  perfect  tenses,  as,  "  I  have  lived 
my  life,"  "I  have  lived  here  for  many  years." 

Continuous  action  is  usually  expressed  in  English 
by  the  present  participle  with  the  auxiliary  be.  These 
forms  are  found  through  all  the  six  tenses  and  are  some- 
times called  the  progressive  tense-forms.  In  the  present 
and  past  another  phrase-form,  called  the  emphatic, 
is  made  by  the  use  of  the  auxiliary  do.  These  verbal 
forms  are  used  in  interrogative  and  negative  sentences 
also. 

The  future  tense  has  two  forms  which  may  be  briefly 
indicated  as  follows: 

1.  I  shall.     You  will.       He  will. 

2.  I  will.      You  shall.     He  shall. 

The  first  of  these,  however,  is  the  fundamental  form 
of  the  future  tense.  The  second  of  these  future  forms 
is  sometimes  classed  as  a  modal  form  rather  than  as 
the  true  future  tense.  (See  Chapter  37.) 


Tense  115 

Old  English  had  fewer  tense  forms  than  we  recognize 
to-day.  There  was  no  distinct  form  for  the  future,  its 
place  being  covered  by  the  present,  a  practice  which  is 
still  recognized  as  correct,  as  "  He  comes  (or  is  coming) 
to  town  to-morrow."  The  present  is  also  the  necessary 
tense  to  express  unchangeable  truths,  as,  "  God  is  good," 
"Man  is  an  animal."  It  is  also  used  to  make  past 
events  appear  more  vivid,  and  in  this  use,  it  has  some- 
times been  called  the  historical  present.  The  too 
frequent  use  of  this  form  may  become  a  mannerism 
with  writers. 

The  distinction  of  six  tenses  belongs  only  to  the  in- 
dicative mood.  In  the  subjunctive  the  verb  be  has  two 
tense  forms,  be  and  were,  but  the  difference  in  their  use 
is  not  strictly  one  of  time.  Other  verbs  have  progressive 
subjunctive  forms  made  by  using  be  and  were  as  auxili- 
aries with  the  present  participle,  also  a  perfect  sub- 
junctive in  the  third  person  with  have  as  the  auxiliary, 
as,  "If  he  have  done  it,"  but  this  is  rarely  used  in 
modern  English. 

The  so-called  potential  mood  has  imperfect  and 
perfect  forms  with  each  of  its  auxiliaries,  and  since 
some  of  the  auxiliaries  are  past  tenses  of  the  rest,  the 
potential  mood  is  sometimes  said  to  have  four  tenses, 
present,  present  perfect,  past,  and  past  perfect.  The 
meaning  and  use  of  these  potential  phrases  should  be 
carefully  considered,  but  the  distinctions  are  not  chiefly 
those  of  time  signification.  Participles  and  infinitives 
have  also  imperfect  and  perfect  forms  which  are  some- 
times treated  as  tenses  in  a  certain  sense, 


116  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

There  are  a  few  questions  of  syntax  that  relate  to  the 
connection  of  tenses  in  clauses  of  the  same  sentence. 
In  the  expressions  "I  think  I  shall,"  and  "I  thought  I 
should,"  the  tense  of  the  subordinate  verb  has  been 
determined  by  that  of  the  principal  clause.  But  when 
a  universal  truth  is  quoted  indirectly,  the  present  tense 
is  not  relinguished  on  account  of  any  supposed  need 
of  agreement,  as,  "Such  a  man  would  not  admit  that 
two  and  two  is  (not  was)  four."  Special  care  must  be 
exercised  in  regard  to  the  tense  of  an  infinitive  after 
certain  verbs,  as,  "  He  hoped  to  do  it "  (not,  to  have 
done  it.)  There  are  examples  in  literature,  however, 
where  the  perfect  infinitive  seems  to  be  justified.  In 
Milton's  line,  "He  trusted  to  have  equalled  the  Most 
High,"  the  perfect  infinitive  seems  to  have  been  chosen 
partly  by  the  sense  of  attraction,  and  partly  from  the 
wish  having  extended  itself  to  the  completed  fact.  But 
the  subject  of  connection  of  tenses,  like  many  other 
grammatical  subjects,  is  a  matter  of  clear  thinking 
rather  than  of  grammatical  or  rhetorical  rules,  and  is 
best  treated  by  the  examination  of  concrete  illustrations. 
The  older  English  allowed  tense  attractions  that  Would 
now  be  condemned,  as,  "He  knew  what  was  in  man." 

The  subject  of  tense  has  been  variously  treated  by 
grammarians  and  more  than  twenty  tenses  have  been 
recognized.  To  adhere  to  six  because  there  are  six 
tenses  in  Latin  is  not  perhaps  a  very  good  reason.  Yet 
English  grammar  seems  to  have  settled  upon  six  tenses 
and  this  is  perhaps  as  good  a  number  as  can  be  named, 
though  the  distinction  between  phrase  forms  and  true 


Tense  117 

tense  inflection  must  not  be  lost  sight  of.  The  student 
need  not  use  all  the  nomenclature  that  has  been  aj>] 
to  the  tenses.  But  he  should  know  the  different  terms 
in  order  to  deal  intelligently  with  the  text  of  various 
grammars,  and  with  the  facts  of  comparative  grammar 
that  throw  light  upon  the  structure  of  the  English  lan- 
guage. 


XXIV 
NOUNS  AND  THE  NOUN  RELATIONS 

Grammarians,  anxious  to  give  some  easy  rule  by  which 
the  scholar  might  distinguish  nouns  from  other  words,  have 
devoted  time  to  put  the  words  the  good  before  any  word, 
and  have  told  him  that  if  the  three  words  make  sense  the 
last  word  is  a  noun.  This  is  frequently  the  case,  as  "the 
good  horse,"  "the  good  dog,"  but  "the  good  sobriety" 
would  not  appear  to  be  very  good  sense.  You  must  employ 
your  mind  in  order  to  arrive  at  the  knowledge  here  derived. 
— FROM  COBBETT'S  GRAMMAR.  Published  in  London,  1818. 
Called  by  Bulwer  "the  only  amusing  grammar  in  the  world." 

The  difference  between  common  and  proper  nouns  is  tho 
logical  difference  between  universals  and  particulars  and  has 
no  place  in  grammar  whatever. — FITCH. 

"Grammar  deals  with  thought  relations." 

The  lack  of  inflection  is  the  student's  best  opportunity 
in  thought  analysis,  and  in  study  of  language  tendencies 
and  of  the  necessary  relation  of  thought  and  speech. — 
DAVENPORT  AND  EMERSON. 

Nouns  are  recognized  by  the  fact  that  they  are  name* 
words.  But  the  basis  of  classification  for  parts  of 
speech  is  the  use  of  the  word  in  sentences,  and  the  fact 
that  the  noun  (by  virtue  of  being  a  name)  is  the  natural 
subject  of  a  sentence,  should  also  be  pointed  out. 

In  subdividing  a  part  of  speech,  we  should  ask  what 
grammatical  purpose  is  to  be  served  by  the  classification. 
The  division  of  classes  of  nouns  is  less  a  grammatical 

118 


Nouns  and  The  Noun  Relations 

than   a  logical  distinction.     But  it  has  some  gram- 
matical bearings  as  well. 

The  common  noun  is  the  name  of  a  class  of  objects. 
It  is  only  common  nouns,  as  a  rule,  that  can  take  an 
accompanying  restrictive  adjective  or  that  permit  a 
plural  form.  In  the  singular,  a  common  noun  usually 
takes  the  indefinite  article  unless  some  more  distinct: 
adjective  term  is  used  with  it. 

A  proper  noun  is  the  name  of  an  individual 
and  may  be  meaningless  or  arbitrary  in  signification. 
A  proper  noun  seldom  takes  an  article  or  accompany  i 
adjective.  The  article  the,  however,  accompanies 
many  geographical  proper  names,  as  The  Mississippi, 
The  Sahara.  This  was  less  the  case  formerly  than  now. 
In  the  Bible,  for  instance,  Jordan,  Euphrates,  etc., 
are  used  without  the  article.  If  made  plural  or  limited 
by  the  indefinite  article  a  proper  noun  loses  a  little 
of  its  "proper"  character  and  becomes  in  a  sense  a 
class  name,  as,  "The  Henrys,"  "A  Daniel  come  to 
judgment." 

An  abstract  noun  denotes  a  quality  or  sonx 
circumstance  considered  in  general  terms,  as  coolness, 
life,  motion.     Its  grammatical  properties   are   similar 
to  those  of  the  proper  noun,  and  like  that  it  bee- 
kind  of  class  name  if  pluralized  or  preceded  by  an  in- 
definite article,  as,  "The  hopes  of  man,"  "A  virtue." 

A  noun  denoting  material  (as  wool,  leather)  is  closely 
allied  to  abstract  nouns  in  meaning  and  in  seldom 
taking  a  plural  form. 

Collective  nouns  are  class  names  and  therefore  com- 


1£0  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

mon  nouns.  But  they  can  take  either  singular  or  plural 
agreements,  according  as  the  thought  is  centered  on  the 
group  or  on  the  individuals  composing  it,  as,  "The 
herd  is  large,"  "The  lowing  herd  wind  slowly  o'er  the 
lea."  (For  Verbal  nouns  see  Chapters  40  and  41.) 

The  amount  of  inflection  belonging  to  nouns  is  far 
less  in  modern  than  in  early  English.  Nouns  to-day 
have  number,  and  one  change  of  form  for  case.  A  few 
nouns  also  show  a  trace  of  gender  inflection. 

The  distinction  between  the  cases  of  a  noun  and 
the  relations  in  which  the  noun  may  be  used,  should 
be  held  clearly  in  mind.  Although  the  inflection  of 
the  noun  is  meagre  the  relations  in  which  the  simple 
or  nominative  form  may  be  used  are  numerous.  The 
more  important  of  these  may  be  illustrated  as  follows: 

The  boy  is  here, — subject. 

He  is  a  boy, — attribute,  or  predicate  noun. 

Boy,  come  here, — independent  (or  vocative). 

John,  the  boy  you  wanted,  is  here, — appositive. 

He  saw  a  boy, — object  of  a  verb. 

He  spoke  to  the  boy, — object  of  a  preposition. 

He  gave  the  boy  an  apple, — indirect  object. 

It  will  make  him  a  good  boy, — factitive  object.  (Also  called 
objective  complement,  attribute,  or  predicate.) 

The  boy  being  gone,  we  waited.  Used  subjectively  in  an 
absolute  phrase. 

He  being  a  good  boy,  we  trusted  him.  Used  attributively 
in  an  absolute  phrase. 

To  be  a  good  boy  is  his  desire.  Used  absolutely  in  an 
infinitive  phrase. 

A  few  nouns  of  distance,  time,  etc.,  may  be  used 
adverbially  after  a  verb,  as,  "He  walked  a  mile,"  "He 


Nouns  and  the  Noun  Rela'ions  121 

waited  two  hours."  Such  a  noun  is  sometimes  called 
an  adverbial  object.  Certain  colloquial  idioms  fall 
into  this  class,  as,  "It  is  only  skin  deep,"  "I  don't  care 
a  snap." 

Most  of  the  noun  relations  are  shared  with  pronouns 
also.  At  least  there  is  no  hard  and  fixed  principle  that 
forbids  the  use  of  pronouns  in  any  substantive  relation. 
Practically,  however,  pronouns  are  seldom  used  in 
several  of  the  rarer  or  more  difficult  noun  constructions. 
The  independent  (or  vocative)  construction  cannot  well 
be  filled  by  a  pronoun.  Pronouns  are  seldom  (if  ever) 
found  in  the  position  of  factitive  object  or  as  the  absolute 
attribute  after  a  copulative  infinitive. 

In  general,  however,  it  may  be  said  that  a  pronoun 
may  fill  any  noun  relation  when  it  can  be  done  without 
ambiguity,  or  violation  of  any  other  principle  of  good 
rhetorical  style. 


XXV 

ADJECTIVES 

"A  word  united  to  a  class  noun  to  narrow  its  range  and 
increase  its  meaning." 

The  phrase  "assuming  adjective"  is  a  happy  substitute 
for  "attributive  adjective."  But  why  not  also  say  "assert- 
ing "  instead  of  "  predicate  "  adjective?  Assuming  and  assert- 
ing almost  seem  to  have  been  foreordained  from  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world  for  this  use. — TOLMAN. 

Each  period  or  generation  has  one  or  more  social  adjec- 
tives which  may  be  used  freely  and  safely.  Such  adjectives 
enjoy  a  sort  of  empire  for  the  time  in  which  they  are  current. 
Their  meaning  is  more  or  less  vague,  and  it  is  this  quality 
that  fits  them  for  their  office. — EARLE. 

The  adjective  is  the  greatest  chatterbox  and  the  veriest 
gossip  that  ever  lived. — FROM  GRAMMARLAND,  OR  GRAMMAR 
IN  FUN.  NESBITT,  1878. 

It  is  a  good  rule  to  be  frugal  with  adjectives;  to  select 
them  carefully  and  to  apply  them  so  happily  that  they  will 
add  an  effective  descriptive  element  to  composition. — 
MANLEY  AND  HAILMANN. 

An  educated  gentleman  may  not  know  many  languages, 
may  not  be  able  to  speak  any  but  his  own,  may  have  read 
very  few  books.  But  whatever  language  he  knows  he  knows 
precisely;  whatever  word  he  pronounces  he  pronounces 
rightly.  Above  all,  he  is  learned  in  the  peerage  of  words, 
knows  the  words  of  true  descent  and  ancient  blood  at  a 
glance  from  words  of  modern  canaille,  remembers  all  their 
ancestry,  their  intermarriages,  distant  relationships,  and  the 
extent  to  which  they  were  admitted  and  offices  they  held 

122 


Adjectives  123 

among  the  natural  noblesse  of  words  at  any  time  and  in  any 
country. — RUSKIN. 

A  word  fitly  spoken  is  like  apples  of  gold  in  pictures  of 
silver. — KING  SOLOMON. 

An  adjective  is  a  noun  modifier.  The  articles 
many  of  the  numerals,  demonstratives,  possessives,  in- 
terrogatives  and  relatives  are  included  among  adjec-j 
tives.  The  possessive  cases  of  nouns  and  pronouns  andj 
the  participles  of  verbs  are  also  of  the  adjective  class. 
All  of  these  are  treated  explicitly  in  other  chapters  oi 
this  book.  There  remains,  however,  one  large  division 
of  adjectives,  which  represents  the  idea  generally  sug- 
gested by  the  term  adjective.  It  includes  those  words 
of  descriptive  meaning  which  limit  a  noun  by  expressing 
a  quality  of  the  object  named  by  the  noun. 

Qualities  vary  in  degree  and  a  word  expressing  a 
quality  has  usually  a  relative  meaning.  It  is  only  these 
qualifying  adjectives  with  a  few  denoting  quantity  and 
the  adverbs  that  are  allied  to  them,  that  have  the  in- 
flection of  comparison. 

In  old  English  the  adjective  was  declined  to  agree 
with  its  substantive.     As  late  as   the  fourteenth    cen- 
tury the  ending  e  was  used  to  mark  a  plural  adj 
But,  except  in  the  case  of  the  demonstratives  this  and 
that,  all  number  forms  of  adjectives  have  disappeared 
and  the  amount  of  pure  grammar  that  belongs  to  adj < 
tives  is  very  small.     In  the  fields  of  diction  and  of 
rhetorical  style,  the  adjective  demands  more  extensive 
treatment. 

Students  of  etymology  give  much  attention  to  the  forms 


124  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

that  adjectives  assume.  Many  Latin  suffixes,  as  ate, 
ent,  ary,  ive,  ose,  and  al,  also  a  few  French  and  Greek 
suffixes,  as  esque  and  ic9  distinguish  large  classes  of 
adjectives.  There  are  many  prefixes  and  suffixes  that 
are  freely  used  to  form  new  adjective  terms  from  other 
English  words.  Among  these  are  the  prefixes  un,  sub, 
and  super;  also  the  suffixes  ful,  less,  able,  some,  and 
others.  Some  of  these  are  added  to  nouns  to  form 
adjectives,  as  in  fruitful,  troublesome,  senseless,  rainy. 
Others  are  added  to  verbs,  as  in  movable,  active. 

Almost  any  noun  can  take  an  adjective  use,  as  in 
horse  rake,  coal  oil,  mineral  soap,  mosquito  bite.     Com- 
pounds are  common  among  adjective  terms,  as  four- 
footed,  high-spirited,  life-like,  new-born. 
1     Adjectives  are  of  two  classes  according  to  the  posi- 
rtions  they  occupy.     Those  which  accompany  the  noun 
(usually    preceding    it)    are    often    called    attributive 
adjectives.     When  several  adjectives  limit  the  same 
|l  noun   the  one  expressing  the  most  inherent  quality 
I   stands  nearest  to  it,  as,  "a  feeble  old  man."    An  ad- 
jective may  also  be  used  after  a  copula  as  a  predicate 
term.     The  use  of  an  adjective  implies  an  act  of  judg- 
ing, so  the  predicate  use  of  an  adjective  is  a  primary 
office,  as,  "The  sky  is  red."    Many  of  the  predicate 
adjective  terms,  however,  are  participles,  as,   "The 
book  is  written." 

Since  the  use  of  an  adjective  implies  an  act  of  indi- 
vidual judging,  a  careful  speaker  often  feels  a  sense  of 
modesty  in  using  a  descriptive  adjective,  except  for  the 
more  obvious  qualities  of  objects.  A  wise  writer  or 


Adjectives  125 

speaker  will  be  discriminating  in  his  use  of  adjectives, 
and  avoid  over-coloring,  or  exaggerated  statements  as 
weakening  to  style.     Yet  the  restriction  should  not 
so  great  as  to  make  the  style  bald  or  prosaic.     One 
should  do  justice  to  his  own  impressions  of  objects. 

There  are  many  adjectives  of  rather  vague  meaning 
which  express  not  so  much  objective  qualities  as 
subjective  impression  which  objects  give  to  the  ob- 
server's mind.  Such  adjectives  as  nice,  elegant,  quaint, 
refined,  coarse,  splendid,  beautiful,  and  horrid,  belong 
to  this  class.  These  adjectives  owing  to  their  lack  of 
defmiteness  are  put  to  many  uses.  They  are  conven- 
tional in  application,  and  sometimes  change  their 
meaning  from  one  generation  to  another.  They  are 
also  difficult  to  translate  into  the  idiom  of  other  lan- 
guages. 

For  these,  and  other  reasons,  the  rhetoric  of  adjec- 
tives is  an  important  and  difficult  subject.  Precision 
and  propriety  of  style  depend  very  much  upon  the 
writer's  choice  of  adjective  terms.  An  abundant 
vocabulary  of  adjectives  to  choose  from,  is  a  part  of  a 
good  writer's  stock  in  trade.  The  free  command  of 
such  a  vocabulary,  with  good  taste  and  careful  observa- 
tion, and  a  desire  to  tell  the  truth,  will  enable  a  writer  to 
add  much  strength  and  beauty  to  style  through  his 
appropriate  use  of  adjective  terms. 


XXVI 

THE  ARTICLES 

1   Three  little  words  you  often  see 
Are  Articles  a,  an,  and  the. 

— RHYME  IN  OLD  GRAMMAR. 

"It  is  manifestly  incongruous  to  give  a  whole  part  of 
speech  to  three  such  little  words  regardless  of  the  dispropor- 
tion of  dictionary  space." 

Two  adjectives  require  special  attention,  the  articles  a  or  an 
and  the,  the  one  being  historically  a  numeral,  the  other  a 
demonstrative. — EMERSON. 

The  rare  and  judicious  use  of  the  article  in  English  is  one 
of  the  points  in  which  its  beautiful  simplicity  is  best  shown. 
In  its  proper  omission,  especially  whenever  the  sense  of  the 
noun  is  not  limited  or  determined,  lies  an  excellence  of  Eng- 
lish, even  over  Greek  where  it  is  often  used  without  giving 
additional  weight  or  conferring  a  clearer  meaning  to  the 
noun  which  it  accompanies. — M.  SCHELE  DE  VERB. 

The  older  text-books  not  only  made  the  article  a 
part  of  speech  in  English,  but  placed  it  first  in  the 
list.  There  are  modern  grammars  which  in  their 
effort  to  reduce  grammar  to  a  minimum  leave  out  all 
reference  to  this  class  of  words.  But  in  spite  of  their 
diminutive  size,  and  the  paucity  of  their  grammatical 
properties,  there  are  interesting  and  important  ques- 
tions that  relate  to  the  meaning  and  use  of  articles. 

The  articles  are  to-day  classed  with  the  adjectives  and 

120 


The  Articles  127 

properly  so,  but  they  differ  from  all  other  adjectives  in 
the  closeness  of  their  relation  to  nouns,  a  relation  so 
close  as  hardly  to  allow  of  their  being  uttered  as  dis- 
tinct words,  but  rather  as  a  kind  of  prefix  to  the  sub- 
stantives which  they  accompany. 

The  origin  of  these  little  words  throws  some  light  on 
their  general  adjective  character.  The  is  a  weakened 
form  of  the  demonstrative  adjective  that,  while  an  or 
a  is  a  modified  form  of  ane  or  one. 

The  expressions  "a  one,"  "a  union,"  illustrate  the 
fact  that  it  is  the  initial  sound  of  the  word  rather  than 
the  initial  letter  which  guides  the  choice  of  form  for  the 
indefinite  article.  Before  an  unaccented  syllable  begin- 
ning with  h,  the  form  an  is  sometimes  used,  since  the 
consonant  character  of  h  is  not  distinctly  marked, 
as  "an  historical  novel." 

In  the  older  English  an  was  used  before  h,  in  some 
cases  where  we  now  use  a,  as,  "  When  they  had  sung 
an  hymn  they  went  unto  the  Mount  of  Olives." 

Articles  have  no  inflection  and  therefore  no  agree- 
ment. The  old  rule,  "Articles  must  agree  with  their 
nouns  in  number,"  simply  means  that  the  indefinite 
article  is  singular  in  meaning  and  accompanies  a 
singular  noun.  In  the  oldest  English  the  article  was 
declined  with  five  cases,  as  is  to-day  the  fact  in  German 
and  some  other  languages. 

There  are  many  delicate  questions  of  grammar  or  of 
rhetoric  that  relate  to  the  use  or  omission  of  the  article. 
Some  of  these  are  suggested  by  comparison  of  such 
expressions  as, 


128  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

A  cotton  and  a  silk  umbrella. 
A  cotton  and  silk  umbrella. 

or, 

The  northern  and  eastern  boundary. 
The  northern  and  the  eastern  boundary. 
The  northern  and  eastern  boundaries. 

While  the  omission  of  a  necessary  article  is  a  frequent 
grammatical  error  there  are  not  wanting  cases  of  its 
meaningless  and  erroneous  insertion,  as, 

"A  rare  kind  of  an  eagle,"  for  "a  rare  kind  of  eagle." 

By  comparing  "There  are  a  few"  and  "There  are 
few/'  we  see  that  the  second  admits  deficiency  and  is 
really  negative  in  meaning.  The  before  an  adjective 
converts  it  into  a  noun  of  generic  meaning,  as  "  None 
but  the  brave  deserves  the  fair."  But  the  omission  of 
the  article  sometimes  gives  a  noun  a  wider  generic 
meaning.  Man  is  a  wider  term  than  "  a  man  "  or  "  the 
man."  Most  nouns,  however,  cannot  be  used  ab- 
stractly in  this  way.  Table  and  book,  for  instance,  do 
not  admit  of  this  generic  application. 

If  a  noun  is  limited  by  both  an  article  and  another 
adjective,  the  article  usually  precedes.  Yet  there  are 
idiomatic  phrases  containing  pronominal  adjectives 
where  the  article  follows  the  other,  as,  "What  a  story," 
"Such  an  action,"  "Half  an  hour,"  "Both  the  hands," 
"  Many  a  man."  Although  a  usually  follows  many,  the 
phrases  "a  great  many,"  "a  good  many,"  are  in  com- 
mon use.  When  an  adjective  is  modified  by  an  adverb 


The  Articles  129 

of  degree  it  often  precedes  the  article,  as,  "  So  difficult 
a  task." 

There  are  words  that  resemble  articles,  whose  unlike 
character  should  be  recognized.  In  "  Daddy's  gone 
a-hunting,"  a  is  an  old  preposition,  a  contracted  form 
of  at.  In  "The  more  the  merrier,"  the  is  an  adverb, 
though  the  idiom  is  said  to  be  derived  from  the  in- 
strumental case  of  the  old  English  inflection. 

Latin  differs  from  modern  languages  in  having  no 
article.  The  recognition  of  articles  by  grammarians 
led  to  the  enumeration  in  the  early  English  grammars 
of  nine  parts  of  speech.  Later  opinion,  however,  has 
relegated  the  articles  to  their  true  position  as  a  small, 
though  important,  sub-class  under  adjectives. 


xxvn 

THE  PERSONAL  PRONOUNS 

Venerable  relics  of  language. — M.  SCHELE  DE  VERB. 

The  pronouns  are  among  the  oldest  parts  of  speech,  and 
consequently  have  undergone  much  change,  so  that  their 
original  forms  are  greatly  altered.  Yet  they  have  preserved 
more  relics  of  the  older  inflections  than  any  other  part  of 
speech. — MORRIS. 

A  pronoun  is  as  instantly  discredited  by  any  doubt  about 
what  it  represents  as  an  ambassador. — ARLO  BATES. 

"Pronouns  are  the  most  general  kind  of  name,  and  depend 
on  the  circumstances  of  the  sentence  for  their  meaning." 

/  Pronouns  in  general  are  words  which  without  being 
names  and  without  being  limited  by  an  article  are  used 
in  the  relations  of  nouns.  There  is  far  less  distinctive- 
ness  in  pronouns  as  an  entire  class  than  belongs  to  the 
great  divisions  of  pronouns  taken  separately. 

The  personal  pronouns  especially  are  a  definitely 
marked  class  of  words,  and  these  are  usually  meant 
when  one  speaks  of  the  pronouns.  The  other  classes 
of  pronouns — adjective  pronouns,  interrogatives  and 
relatives — have  a  mixed  character,  and  contain  ele- 
ments that  ally  them  to  other  parts  of  speech. 

The  personal  pronouns  are  so  named  because  they 
have  grammatical  person,  the  only  other  English 
words  that  have  this  property  being  a  few  verbal  forms 
that  take  personal  agreements  with  their  subjects. 

130 


The  Personal  Pronouns  131 

They  are  used  not  so  much  to  "  avoid  repetition  of  the 
noun,"  as  to  express  personality.  It  is  a  marked  step 
in  a  child's  development,  when  he  recognizes  his  own 
personality  and  begins  to  say  "I."  Although  the 
personal  pronouns  are  small  in  size  and  few  in  number, 
they  seem  to  contain  in  themselves  and  in  their  agree- 
ments a  most  disproportionate  part  of  the  difficulties 
of  grammar.  There  is  no  other  group  of  words  of 
equally  diminutive  size  that  require  so  full  and  careful 
treatment  at  the  hands  of  grammarians,  as  the  personal 
pronouns. 

Almost  all  that  there  is  of  case  and  of  gender  as  well 
as  of  person  belongs  to  the  personal  pronouns.  It  has 
been  said  that  if  five  small  words,  she,  her,  hers,  it  and 
its,  were  blotted  out  of  the  language  there  would  be  no 
longer  need  to  recognize  gender  in  English  grammar. 
He,  his  and  him  would  then  have  a  common  sex  sig- 
nification, as  is  now  the  case  with  the  plural  pronouns 
and  we  should  be  saved  all  discussion  of  gender  forms 
and  agreements. 

Each  of  the  personal  pronouns  has  some  peculiari- 
ties of  its  own  and  requires  separate  treatment. 

Writers  on  rhetoric  sometimes  object  to  the  use  of  the 
first  person  in  written  composition  as  savoring  of  ego- 
ism. A  good  writer  will  usually  veil  his  own  personality 
and  express  his  thoughts  in  an  impersonal  way.  Yet  in 
epistolary  writings  or  when  the  writer's  personal  ex- 
perience is  the  fitting  theme,  there  is  no  reason  for  ex- 
cluding the  simple  pronoun,  and  it  is  a  false  modesty 
that  resorts  to  unnatural  devices  in  order  to  avoid  it. 


132  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

\ 

We  is  not  exactly  the  plural  of  J,  since  there  is  usually 
but  one  /  in  the  group  referred  to  as  we.  We  is  some- 
times used  in  a  representative  sense;  as  the  editorial 
We,  which  expresses  the  sentiments  of  a  paper 
rather  than  of  an  individual  editor ;  or  the  royal  We, 
which  refers  to  a  king  as  the  head  of  the  nation  rather 
than  in  his  personal  capacity.  It  is  said  that  the  royal 
We  was  first  used  by  King  John  who  "  thus  found  out 
the  art  of  multiplying  himself."  We  is  also  used  for 
human  beings  generally,  as, "  Here  we  have  no  continu- 
ing city  but  we  seek  one  to  come."  When  a  writer  is 
expressing  his  individual  sentiments  I  should  generally 
be  used. 

The  second  person  singular  is  not  used  in  modern 
English  except  in  the  formal  language  of  prayer  or  of 
poetry.  Yet  for  these  two  purposes  it  ought  to  be 
thoroughly  familiar  to  the  English  student.  The 
Dutch  language  has  gone  even  farther  than  the  Eng- 
lish in  ignoring  the  second  person  singular  and  uses  the 
plural  form  for  both  poetry  and  prayer. 

The  substitution  of  the  plural  for  the  singular  in 

English    began    about    the    thirteenth    century    and 

seems  to  have  been  made  at  first  for  the  monarchs  and 

the  nobility.     The  Quakers  gave  religious  testimony 

to  the  equality  of  all  men  by  retaining  thee  and  thou. 

They  would  not  render  reverence  to  one  and  withhold 

it   from   others.     Thus   Charles   Fox  wrote   in    1648, 

'  When  the  Lord  sent  me  into  the  world,  I  was  required 

to  thee  and  thou  all  men  and  women  without  respect 

to  rich  and  poor,  great  or  small." 


The  Personal  Pronouns  133 

But  it  seems  to  have  been  difficult  for  Quakers  to 
retain  the  inflectional  form  of  the  second  person,  espe- 
cially the  verbal  form,  after  it  went  out  of  common  use. 
So  colloquial  Quaker  dialect  came  to  contain  such 
anomalous  expressions  as  "thee  does,"  "thee  is," 
which  were  afterwards  retained  by  educated  Quakers 
as  a  mere  conventionalism  or  a  means  of  giving  dis- 
tinctiveness  to  the  Quaker  sect. 

From  the  fourteenth  to  the  seventeenth  century 
thou  was  used  to  express  familiarity  toward  friends, 
superiority  toward  inferiors,  and  anger  or  contempt 
toward  strangers  or  enemies.  Thus  Coke's  historical 
insult  to  Sir  Walter  Raleigh  was,  "  Thou  viper,  for  I  will 
thou  thee,  thou  traitor."  In  the  writings  of  Robert  de 
Brunne  (1303)  a  conversation  between  husband  and 
wife  is  given,  in  which  she  says  Ye  to  her  lord,  but  he 
calls  her  thou. 

In  the  German  and  French  languages,  the  second 
person  singular  is  made  to  express  familiarity,  whether 
it  be  that  of  endearment  or  of  contempt.  The  English 
student  of  these  languages  needs  to  be  mindful  of  the 
proprieties  of  a  situation  or  he  can  easily  give  offence 
either  by  exceeding  or  withholding  the  familiarity  that 
is  felt  to  be  due.  "  Ach,"  said  the  sentimental  German 
maiden  who  had  lately  acquired  a  lover,  "  That  first  du\ 
How  sweet  it  is!" 

Ye  was  originally  the  nominative  plural,  you  being 
the  objective  or  dative  form.  Afterwards  ye  was  some- 
times used  as  an  objective,  as, 


134  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

The    more    shame    for  ye  ;  holy  men  I  thought  ye.— 
KING  HENRY  VIII. 

You  is  now  the  form  for  both  cases.  But  in  King 
James's  version  of  the  Bible  the  original  case  distinc- 
tions of  ye  and  you  are  carefully  preserved,  as,  "  I  have 
piped  unto  you  and  ye  have  not  danced." 

He  and  she  have  been  used  as  nouns  by  Shakespeare 
and  other  writers,  as,  " The  fairest  she,"  "The  proudest 
he."  He  was  frequently  used  in  old  English  where  ii 
would  now  be  employed.  Thus  Lily's  grammar  says, 
"The  Subjunctive  Mood  has  commonly  some  con- 
junction joined  with  him."  An  old  dialect  form  of  the 
third  person  was  a,  as,  "  A  brushes  his  hair  a  mornings." 
The  colloquial  use  of  em,  as  "  Give  'em  to  me,"  is  not 
a  contraction  of  them,  but  a  survival  of  hem  the  old 
plural  dative  of  the  pronoun. 

The  pronoun  of  the  third  person  singular  is  the  one 
example  in  English  of  three  gender-forms.  The  only 
genuinely  neuter  word  that  the  language  contains  is  the 
pronoun  it.  Its  original  form  was  hit,  and  it  had  the 
same  possessive  form  as  the  masculine,  his,  which  was 
employed,  with  sexless  signification,  as,  "If  the  salt 
have  lost  his  savour. "  Occasionally  also  her  was  used 
in  this  way  as,  "Let  patience  have  her  perfect  work." 
In  the  writings  of  Shakespeare  his  is  often  used  with 
sexless  signification,  as  in  the  Bible.  Shakespeare  also 
uses  the  nominative  form  it  as  a  possessive  in  simple 
juxtaposition,  as,  "Go  to  it  grandam,  child.  Give 
grandam  kingdom  and  it  grandam  will  give  it  a  plum, 
a  cherry,  and  a  fig." 


The  Personal  Pronouns  185 

Its  is  comparatively  a  modern  word.  Spenser  never 
uses  it.  The  single  instance  in  which  its  occurs  in  the 
King  James  version  of  the  Bible  (Lev.  25,  5)  is  a  com- 
paratively recent  substitution  for  the  original  form  it, 
"That  which  groweth  of  it  own  accord,"  etc. 

The  introduction  of  its  seems  to  have  been  retarded 
by  the  idea  that  if  an  object  became  the  owner  of 
something  it  was  personified,  so  that  his  or  her  was 
the  proper  term  to  employ. 

The  use  of  the  pronoun  it  is  extended  to  refer  to  young 
children  and  to  the  lower  animals  when  the  distinction 
of  sex  is  not  observed. 

The  very  multiplicity  of  gender  forms  in  the  third 
person  of  the  pronoun  gives  us  a  sense  of  incompleteness. 
There  is  no  singular  pronoun  that  applies  equally  to 
the  two  sexes.  To  supply  this  lack  the  masculine  form 
has  sometimes  been  adopted.  But  none  of  the  ex- 
pedients that  have  been  tried  are  totally  without  objec- 
tion for  all  requirements. 

In  the  text-books  on  grammar  two  forms  are  given  for 
the  possessive  of  most  of  the  personal  pronouns.  Of 
these,  the  first  forms,  my,  our,  thy,  your,  her  and  their 
are  used  only  as  noun  modifiers,  and  by  a  few  gram- 
marians they  are  called  adjectives.  The  second  forms 
hers,  ours,  yours,  and  theirs  are  often  called  absolute 
or  independent  possessive  pronouns,  since  they  are 
never  used  with  an  accompanying  noun.  Its  has  no 
corresponding  absolute  pronoun.  His  is  used  inter- 
changeably "in  the  two  relations.  Mine  and  thine  are 
usually  absolute  or  independent,  but  were  formerly  used 


136  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

in  the  true  possessive  or  adjective  relation  and  are  still 
so  used  in  poetry,  as,  "  Mine  eyes  have  seen  the  glory 
of  the  coming  of  the  Lord."  My  and  thy  formerly 
occurred  only  before  consonant  sounds,  but  gradually 
came  to  be  used  before  vowels  as  well,  mine  and  thine 
being  reserved  mostly  for  the  absolute  functions. 

Hers,  ours,  yours  and  tlicirs  are  really  double  genitive 
forms,  the  s  having  been  added  to  words  already  gen- 
itive in  form.  These  words  are  not  found  in  the  oldest 
English,  but  made  their  appearance  with  the  other 
genitives  in  s,  first  in  the  Northern  dialects.  The  forms 
in  the  Southern  dialects  were  hire  or  hir,  oure,  etc.,  and 
sometimes  ouren,  youren,  etc.  The  remains  of  these 
old  possessives  are  sometimes  met  with  in  provincial 
dialects,  as,  ourn,  hern,  him,  etc. 

In  addition  to  the  simple  personal  pronouns  there  are 
a  few  compound  personal  pronouns,  formed  by  adding 
self  for  the  singular  and  selves  for  the  plural,  to  the  pos- 
sessive case  of  the  first  and  second  persons,  and  to  the 
objective  case  of  the  third  person.  The  objective 
forms  himself  and  themselves  seem  inconsistent  with  our 
sense  of  grammatical  idiom.  Hisself  and  theirselves 
were  formerly  in  use,  and  children,  reasoning  from 
analogy,  are  inclined  to  form  these  compounds.  Chau- 
cer uses  also  an  old  objective  form,  "  Full  wise  is  he  that 
can  hinselven  know." 

^Acompound  personal  pronoun  is  not  used  as  a  sub- 
ject, except  rarely  in  poetry,  as, 

"Myself  will  guide  thee  on  thy  way." 


The  Personal  Pronouns  137 

It  is  usually  either  an  appositive  giving  emphasis,  as, 

"God  himself  will  go  with  thee," 

or  the  reflexive  object  of  a  verb  or  a  preposition,  as,  "  I 
hurt  myself."  The  last  being  the  most  frequent  and 
important  use  of  the  compound  personal  pronouns,  they 
are  often  referred  to  as  the  reflexive  pronouns.  The 
identity  of  form  for  these  two  uses  of  the  compound 
pronouns  is  a  remarkable  peculiarity  of  English,  which, 
unlike  most  modern  languages,  has  no  genuinely  re- 
flexive pronoun,  so  the  compound  personal  pronoun  has 
been  substituted  for  it.  Double  emphasis  is  sometimes 
given  by  the  insertion  of  own,  as  "  My  own  self." 

All  the  personal  pronouns,  whether  simple  or  com- 
pound, and  including  the  pronoun  possess! ves,  whether 
adjective  or  absolute  in  their  function,  may  have  pro- 
nominal agreements  with  an  antecedent  in  gender, 
number  and  person,  and  this  relation  to  an  antecedent 
is  one  of  the  most  important  characteristics  of  personal 
pronouns. 


XXVIII 

THE  ADJECTIVE  PRONOUNS 

Care  must  be  taken  not  to  make  too  many  classes  in  ele- 
mentary grammar;  lest  the  important  ideas  be  made  to 
take  rank  with  the  unimportant,  and  the  unity  and  simplicity 
of  the  movement  in  the  study  of  the  subject  be  destroyed. — 
BROWN  AND  DEGARMO. 

"Although  successful  classification  is  the  main  thing,  the 
work  of  classification  can  easily  be  overdone  and  made 
burdensome  enough  to  frustrate  its  own  aim  by  the  multi- 
plication of  fine  drawn  distinctions  and  of  technical  rules 
designating  them." 

The  indeclinables  confirm  the  English  characteristics. 
They  are  structural  or  functional,  largely  formless  and  with 
free  interchange  of  function. — JOYNES. 

All  things  considered,  it  does  not  seem  desirable  to  recog- 
nize the  relation  of  agreement  in  English.  In  the  case  of 
this  and  that  the  agreement  exists,  but  has  a  logical  basis  in 
the  inflection  of  these  words  as  pronouns. — DAVENPORT  AND 
EMERSON. 

I  leave  many  of  these  indeterminate  pronouns.  To 
notice  every  one  individually  in  a  particular  manner  could 
answer  no  purpose  except  that  of  swelling  the  size  of  a  book 
— a  thing  which  I  most  anxiously  wish  to  avoid. — COBBETT'K 
GRAMMAR,  1818. 

There  is  a  lar^c  class  of  words  of  somrwlmt  related 
meaning,  which  may  be  used  inlcivhan^c;iMy  ;i.s  adjec- 
tives or  pronouns  according  as  the  nouns  to  which  they 
relate  are  expressed  or  merely  understood.  To  these 

138 


The  Adjective  Pronouns  139 

words  the  names  adjective  pronoun  and  pronominal 
adjective  have  been  given  by  different  grammarians, 
according  as  the  emphasis  is  laid  upon  one  or  the  other 
of  these  word  functions. 

In  their  adjective  character  these  words  do  not  ex- 
press definite  qualities,  but  they  usually  point  out  ob- 
jects previously  mentioned,  or  else  they  have  a  some- 
what indefinite  meaning  referring  generally  to  number 
or  quantity. 

Among  these  pronominal  adjective  words  many 
sub-classes  have  been  noted,  but  the  classification  is  by 
no  means  perfect  or  entirely  consistent.  Among  the 
sub-classes  are  the  possessives  and  the  numerals.  This 
and  that  are  known  as  the  demonstratives,  each  and 
every  as  the  distributives,  the  phrases  each  other  and  one 
another  as  reciprocals,  and  there  is  a  large  class  of 
words  which  from  their  general  lack  of  specific  meaning 
are  known  as  the  indefinites.  Other  terms  of  classifica- 
tion have  sometimes  been  given.  Much  and  little  and 
their  related  forms  (more,  less,  etc.)  are  quantitatives. 
All  and  some  are  collectives.  Some  interrogative  and 
relative  words,  as,  what  and  which,  are  also  both  ad- 
jective and  pronominal  in  their  use. 

The  name  adjective  pronoun,  first  given  by  Murray, 
is  the  one  most  commonly  applied  to  the  general  group. 
Yet  for  some  of  these  words  the  adjective  office  is  more 
important  than  the  pronominal.  Indeed,  some  of  these 
related  words  cannot  be  used  interchangeably  in  the  two 
offices.  Thus  the  distributive  adjective  every  cannot 
be  used  in  a  pronominal  relation.  On  the  other  hand 


140  Grammar  and  7/.v  Reasons 

some  of  the  indefinite  pronouns,  as  none,  are  never 
adjective  in  their  use.  Certain  nouns  of  similar  mean- 
ing are  generally  thought  of  in  a  half-pronominal  sense. 
The  line  between  these  and  the  indefinite  adjective 
pronouns  is  not  very  distinctly  drawn.  Such  are  aught, 
naiujht,  anyone,  anybody,  no  one,  nobody,  everyone, 
everybody,  someone,  somebody,  and  even  "a  body," 
meaning  one,  as, 

"Gin  a  body  meet  a  body  comin'  through  the  rye." 

The  earlier  English  contained  some  words  of  this  class 
that  are  now  little  used,  as  in  "  All  and  sundry,"  "  I  have 
somewhat  to  say  unto  thee,"  "Divers  came  from  far," 
"There  were  certain  that  said,"  etc.  While  the  gen- 
eral similarity  of  all  such  words  is  to  be  noted,  the 
grammarian  must  deal  with  each  word  as  pronoun, 
noun,  or  adjective  according  to  the  function  which  it 
fulfils  in  any  individual  sentence. 

Most  of  the  adjective  pronouns  are  without  inflection 
of  any  kind.  A  few  of  them  can  take  plural  or  pos- 
sessive forms,  but  are  then  (with  the  exception  of  thi* 
and  that)  like  nouns  in  their  character,  as,  "Here  are 
the  ones  I  meant,"  "Each  can  feel  the  other's  grief/' 

Any  and  none  are  generally  used  with  plural  mean- 
ings. Any,  however,  was  formerly  singular,  as,  "  If 
any,  speak,  for  him  I  have  offended."  An  old  idiom, 
"this  many  years,"  shows  a  blending  of  numeral 
characteristics. 

In  addition  to  the  adjective  and  the  strictly  pronomi- 
nal use,  some  of  the  indefinites  and  numerals  may  be 


The  Adject  ice  Pronouns  141 

limited  by  adjectives  or  articles  and  are  therefore  allied 
to  nouns  in  their  sentence  relations,  as,  a  few,  the  other , 
such  a  one,  a  good  many,  the  little  one,  the  first. 

Some  of  the  adjective  pronouns  are  often  used  in 
pairs,  as,  this,  that;  the  one,  the  other;  the  former,  the 
latter;  the  first,  the  second;  the  /irs£,  the  Zos£,  etc. 

This  and  <fea^,  known  especially  as  the  demonstra- 
tives, are  far  more  frequently  used  than  most  of  the 
other  adjective  pronouns.  They  have  also  well- 
defined  grammatical  marks  which  are  all  their  own. 
For  this  reason  some  grammarians  have  given  them  the 
distinction  of  being  "a  whole  class"  of  pronouns, 
though  this  seems  to  be  a  rather  questionable  promi- 
nence to  be  given  to  two  words  however  important. 

This  and  that,  whether  used  as  adjectives  or  pronouns, 
have  singular  and  plural  number-forms.  While  most 
English  adjectives,  including  the  articles,  have  lost  all 
their  old  English  inflections,  the  demonstratives  have 
held  securely  to  their  ancient  number-forms. 

Certain  other  words  in  English  are  somewhat  allied  to 
the  demonstratives.  The  article  the  is  in  its  origin  a 
modified  form  of  that.  The  adverbs  here  and  there 
and  the  compounds  herewith  and  therewith  are  also 
used  in  a  demonstrative  sense. 

That  was  originally  purely  a  Saxon  demonstrative, 
but  by  a  widening  of  its  grammatical  functions  it  has 
become  an  important  relative  pronoun  as  well.  It  has 
also  acquired  another  connective  office  and  is  the  most 
important  conjunction  for  substantive  clauses. 

This  and  these  point  out  the  nearer  objects,  that  and 


142  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

those  the  more  remote.  The  application  of  this  princi- 
ple in  poetry  when  referring  to  objects  previously 
mentioned  seems  to  be  that  this  and  these  refer  to  the 
tilings  that  were  last  named,  that  and  those  to  the  ones 
named  earlier,  as, 

"Farewell,  my  friends,  farewell  my  foes, 
My  peace  with  these,  my  love  with  those." 

The  idiom  "  that  of"  borrowed  from  the  French,  is  a 
very  convenient  one  in  English,  as,  "His  dress  was 
that  of  a  shepherd." 

While  there  are  few  general  principles  that  can  be 
formulated  as  applying  to  the  adjective  pronouns,  there 
are  many  specific  questions  relating  to  the  meaning  and 
use  of  the  individual  words,  which  are  of  much  interest 
to  the  student  of  idiomatic  English. 


XXIX 

THE  NUMERALS 

"  The  numerals  present  the  most  compact  system  of  syn- 
optically  harmonious  words  that  comparative  Philology 
discovers." 

The  numerals  afford  us  one  of  the  most  striking  evidences 
of  the  unity  of  the  race  divided  as  it  now  is  into  so  many 
nations.  Men  to  this  day  use  everywhere  the  same  way  of 
counting.  —  M.  SCHELE  DE  VERB. 

The  words  that  express  number  are  grouped  by  one 
or  two  ancient  grammarians  as  a  separate  part  of 
speech;  and  there  is  certainly  sufficient  unity  and 
peculiarity  in  them  to  make  it  desirable  sometimes  to 
speak  of  them  together  as  constituting  a  special  class 
of  words.  Yet  their  functions  vary  and  they  may  be 
found  occupying  the  places  of  nouns,  pronouns,  ad- 
jectives and  adverbs.  Their  primary  function,  how 
ever,  seems  to  be  that  of  adjectives. 

Number  words  are  very  numerous.  Indeed,  they 
may  be  said  to  be  numberless  since  there  is  no  limit  to 
the  extent  to  which  counting  may  be  carried.  Yet 
after  the  first  ten,  our  decimal  system  expresses  new 
number  ideas,  not  by  new  words,  but  by  ingenious 
variations  and  combinations,  with  the  occasional  in- 
troduction of  a  new  term,  as  hundred,  thousand, 
million. 


143 


144  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

The  number  words  used  in  counting,  or  to  express 
simply  how  many,  are  called  the  cardinals.  These  are 
adjective  pronouns  in  their  nature;  that  is,  they  may 
be  used  as  adjectives,  or,  like  pronouns,  they  can  take 
the  noun  office  without  the  use  of  an  article. 

The  number  words  which  express  the  order  in  a  series 
are  called  the  ordinals,  as,  the  first,  the  second,  the 
last,  etc.  These  may  be  adjectives,  or  they  may  be  used 
as  nouns,  usually  having  the  article  prefixed. 

Some  numerals  express  repetition,  or  number  of 
component  parts,  as  three-fold,  double.  These  are 
sometimes  called  multiplicatives,  but  the  name  seems 
less  valuable  than  the  terms  cardinal  and  ordinal. 

There  are  a  few  numerals  which  are  primarily  nouns, 
such  as  pair,  couple,  score,  dozen,  triplet,  trio.  Many  of 
the  indefinite  adjective  pronouns  have  a  kind  of  numeral 
character,  as  few,  several,  many,  some. 

Once  and  twice  are  common  numeral  adverbs. 
Thrice  is  a  similar  word,  now  little  used.  To  express 
the  higher  numbers  adverbially  such  phrases  as  three 
times,  four  times,  are  employed. 

The  place  of  the  numeral  is  usually  before  the  noun. 
In  old  English  and  in  poetry  it  sometimes  follows  the 
noun,  as,  "soldiers  three." 

When  the  cardinal  and  ordinal  numerals  are  used 
together  there  is  a  difference  of  opinion  among  English 
scholars  as  to  which  should  stand  first.  Some  place  the 
ordinal  first,  as,  "The  first  three  stanzas,"  and  justify 
this  usage  on  the  ground  that  only  one  can  be  really 
first.  Other  grammarians  have  contended  that  it  is 


The  Numerals  145 

illogical  to  speak  of  a  first  three  unless  there  are  other 
successive  threes;  also  that  a  plural  idea  in  first  and 
last  is  recognized  both  by  old  English  and  by  the  gram- 
mar of  some  other  languages,  as,  "  There  are  first  that 
shall  be  last."  The  point  does  not  seem  to  be  con- 
clusively settled,  either  by  invincible  argument  or 
uniform  usage,  but  there  is  a  growing  sentiment  in  favor 
of  putting  the  cardinal  numeral  first.  If  it  were  in- 
correct to  say  "three  first"  it  would  be  difficult  to 
justify  such  expressions  as,  "  The  first  hours  of  infancy," 
"The  last  days  of  Pompeii."  Matzner  tells  us  that 
"  In  connection  with  first  and  other  the  cardinal  number 
is  found  before  or  after";  and  gives  these  illustrations: 
"The  first  four  acts." — SHERIDAN.  "For  the  first  ten 
minutes."  —  COOPER.  "Four  other  children." — 
LEWES.  "  Other  seven  days." — GENESIS. 

The  number  form  of  the  verb  for  certain  idiomatic 
numeral  phrases,  as,  "  Three  times  four,"  has  also  been 
a  subject  of  dispute  among  grammarians.  But  it  is 
now  generally  agreed  that  the  singular  is  most  con- 
sistent with  the  idea  to  be  conveyed.  Thus,  "Three 
times  four  (taken  collectively)  is  twelve."  In  a  similar 
way,  "Five  dollars  is  a  large  price." 


XXX 

THE  INTERROGATIVES 

"It  is  easier  to  ask  questions  than  to  answer  them." 
A  wise  questioning  is  the  half-way  toward  knowledge. — 
BACON. 

Interrogation  is  expressed  in  several  ways.  One  of 
these  is  by  a  change  in  the  order  of  the  parts  of  the 
sentence,  usually  placing  the  verbal  auxiliary  before  the 
subject.  In  the  present  and  past  tenses,  where  the 
common  form  of  the  verb  has  no  auxiliary,  the  progres- 
sive or  emphatic  form  of  the  verb  is  usually  adopted, 
thus  gaining  an  auxiliary,  as,  "Is  he  going?"  "Does 
he  think  so?"  The  older  English  used  the  common 
form  of  the  verb  in  these  tenses  as  is  still  done  in  poetry, 
as,  "Know  ye  the  land  where  the  myrtle  blooms ?" 

Another  way  of  expressing  interrogation  is  by  the 
use  of  interrogative  words.  Many  of  these  are  ad- 
verbs, as,  how,  why,  where,  when,  whence,  wherefore, 
and  whither.  Others  belong  to  the  pronoun  or  the 
adjective  group.  The  interrogative  pronouns  are  who, 
which  and  what.  Which  and  what  are  also  interroga- 
tive adjectives,  as,  "What  book  did  you  bring?"  In 
old  English  whether,  meaning  which  of  the  two,  was  also 
an  interrogative  pronoun,  as,  "Whether  of  the  twain 
did  the  will  of  his  father  ?"  The  interrogative  pronoun 
who  has  three  case  forms,  the  others  are  indeclinable. 

146 


The  Interrogative*  147 

In  the  sentences,  "I  asked  who  came,"  and  "He  has 
decided  which  he  will  take,"  who  and  which  are  inter- 
rogative pronouns  which  have  acquired  also  a  con- 
junctive office  by  the  incorporation  of  an  interrogative 
clause  into  another  sentence.  Such  pronouns  are  to 
be  distinguished  from  the  relatives,  which  require  an 
antecedent.  Yet  there  is  a  close  historical  connection 
between  the  two. 

Interrogative  adverbs  may  take  a  similar  conjunctive 
office,  as,  "  He  is  wondering  where  it  may  lead." 

Compound  pronouns  formed  from  who,  which  and 
what  are  occasionally  to  be  found  with  an  interrogative 
use,  as, 

"Whoever  would  have  thought  it?" 

In  spoken  English,  even  among  well-educated  per- 
sons, who  sometimes  introduces  a  question  where  the 
grammatical  relation  is  objective,  as, 

Who  does  this  dreadful  place  belong  to? — MRS.  HUMPH- 
REY WARD. 

In  literary  English  and  in  the  conversation  of  persons 
who  have  a  strong  feeling  for  grammatical  consistency 
this  is  generally  avoided.  Yet  where  the  governing 
word  is  far  removed,  the  tendency  of  the  language 
seems  to  be  to  ignore  the  restrictions  of  case,  as,  "  Who 
do  you  think  the  committee  will  decide  to  give  it  to  ?" 


XXXI 
THE  RELATIVES 

Addison  in  his  Humble  Petition  of  Who  and  Which,* 
allows  the  petitioners  to  say,  "We  are  descended  of  ancient 
families  and  kept  up  our  dignity  and  honor  for  many  years 
till  the  Jack  Sprat  that  supplanted  us."  But  the  supplanting 
was  a  restoration  of  an  incapable  but  legitimate  monarch, 
rather  than  a  usurpation.  Since  the  time  of  Addison,  a 
reaction  has  taken  place;  the  convenience  of  the  three 
distinct  forms  has  been  recognized,  and  we  have  returned 
somewhat  to  the  Elizabethan  usage. — ABBOTT. 

The  use  of  whose  for  of  which  when  the  antecedent  is  not 
only  irrational  but  inanimate  has  had  the  support  of  high 
authority  for  several  hundred  years. — EDWARD  FITZGERALD 
HABL. 

Recasting  is  necessary  whenever  a  pronoun  like  an  unruly 
sheep  shows  a  disposition  to  escape  from  its  master. — ARLO 
BATES. 

When  we  say  "the  relatives"  we  usually  mean 
relative  pronouns,  but  there  are  also  relative  adjectives 
and  relative  adverbs.  The  idea  that  belongs  to  a  rela- 
tive is  that  it  connects  with  an  antecedent  noun  an  ad- 
jective clause  that  limits  that  noun.  A  relative,  there- 
fore, holds  a  conjunctive  office  as  well  as  that  of  another 
part  of  speech. 

The  simple  relative  pronouns  are  who,  which  and 

*  "  The  Humble  Petition  of  Who  and   Which  "   was 
written  by  Sir  Richard  Steele. — See  Spectator,  May  30,  1711. 

148 


The  Relatives  149 

that.  What  is  also  a  relative  simple  in  form,  but  hold- 
ing compound  relations  in  the  sentence.  Who  is  used 
only  in  referring  to  persons,  which  and  what  in  referring 
to  things,  and  that  with  relation  to  either  persons  or 
things.  Which  was  formerly  used  of  persons,  as  well 
as  of  things,  as,  "Our  Father  which  art  in  Heaven." 
For  the  lower  animals  which  or  that  is  used.  In  refer- 
ring to  animals  as  intelligent  beings,  who  is  sometimes 
used,  as,  "You,  my  gallant  gray,  who  have  borne  me 
safely,  etc." 

The  use  of  who,  which,  and  what,  as  relatives,  comes 
•from  the  influence  of  Norman-French,  a  language  in 
which  the  interrogatives  took  on  the  relative  character. 
The  Saxon  language  used  the  demonstratives  for  this 
purpose.  That  is  therefore  a  true  Saxon  relative.  It  is 
used  only  in  restrictive  clauses,  and  is  usually  the  best 
connective  for  such  clauses,  as,  "  The  books  that  I  have 
read."  In  co-ordinating  clauses — that  is,  those  ex- 
pressing an  additional  fact  without  restrictive  force — who 
or  which  is  used.  Yet  these  are  sometimes  used  re- 
strictively  as  well,  especially  when  a  preposition  is  used, 
or  for  reasons  of  euphony.  Some  grammarians  have 
insisted  that  who  should  not  be  used  restrictively,  but 
evidence  from  literature  does  not  support  this  view.  In 
restrictive  clauses  after  a  superlative  or  a  negative 
word,  or  when  the  antecedent  includes  both  men  and 
things,  that  is  always  the  proper  relative,  as  "  These  are 
the  best  that  there  are,"  "These  are  not  the  ones  that 
I  meant." 

The  antecedent  of  which  is  sometimes  an  entire  sen- 


150  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

trnce,  as,  "The  teacher  now  came  in,  which  was  a 
relief."  An  old  English  idiom  allowed  the  use  of  an 
article  with  the  relative  which,  i.e.,  "in  the  which." 

What  as  a  relative  is  equivalent  to  that  which  and 
therefore  includes  its  own  antecedent.  This  gives  to 
the  pronoun  three  functions.  In  the  sentence,  "He 
took  what  he  liked,"  what  is  the  object  of  took,  the  object 
of  liked  and  also  the  connective  of  the  clauses.  This 
condensed  use  of  what  was  perhaps  learned  at  first  from 
the  Latin  quod.  It  occurs  often  at  the  opening  of  sen- 
tences where  the  French  would  use  the  phrase  ce  que. 
Thus  in  Paradise  Lost  we  read,  "What  in  me  is 
dark  illumine,  what  is  low  raise  and  support."  In  the 
older  English  the  pronoun  that  sometimes  took  this 
combined  office  of  antecedent  and  relative,  as,  "Do 
that  is  righteous." 

In  addition  to  the  simple  relative  pronouns  there  are 
others  variously  formed  by  compounding  the  adverbs, 
ever,  so,  and  soever  with  who,  which  or  what.  Of  these 
forms,  the  ones  compounded  with  so  and  soever  are 
older  than  those  in  which  ever  alone  is  used.  These 
compound  relatives,  like  what,  may  usually  be  analyzed 
into  two  words,  and  they  therefore  have  three  functions 
in  the  sentence.  In  "Whatever  is,  is  right,"  whatever 
is  the  subject  of  the  two  verbs,  and  also  the  connective 
of  the  clauses.  Who  at  the  beginning  of  a  sentence 
sometimes  takes  the  same  compound  relationship,  as, 
u  \Vho  steals  my  purse  steals  trash." 

Who  and  its  compounds  have  case-forms;  the  other 
relatives  are  indeclinable.  Murray's  old  grammar 


The  Relatives  151 

gives  the  phrase  "  of  which  "  as  the  possessive  of  which, 
adding  in  a  foot-note,  "  The  possessive  whose  is  some- 
times by  eminent  authors  connected  with  an  antecedent 
of  the  neuter  gender,  but  the  connection  is  rather  a 
poetical  license  than  grammatical  propriety  and  should 
be  avoided."  In  an  earlier  age,  however,  whose  and 
whom  were  used  in  relation  to  things  as  well  as  persons, 
and  there  is  a  tendency  in  modern  English  to  restore 
this  earlier  usage  in  the  case  of  whose,  as,  "  The  glorious 
elevations  on  whose  tops  the  sun  kindles  harmonies  of 
light."  Whose  has  always  been  freely  used  in  poetry 
to  refer  to  things. 

In  using  the  compound  pronouns  derived  from  who9 
it  is  desirable  that  the  functions  given  to  one  pronoun 
should  allow  of  the  same  case-form.  The  sentence, 
"Avoid  whoever  is  in  a  passion,"  is  open  to  criticism 
because  the  two  relations  of  whoever,  as  object  of  avoid 
and  subject  of  is,  require  unlike  case-forms. 

This  class  of  sentences  has  been  variously  treated  by 
different  grammatical  thinkers.  Some  persons  would 
say,  "Give  the  book  to  whomever  comes  in,"  justifying 
this  to  their  own  minds  on  the  ground  that  the  objective 
relation  of  the  pronoun  comes  first  and  belongs  to  the 
principal  clause.  Most  grammarians  perhaps  would 
say,  "Give  the  book  to  whoever  comes  in,"  on  the 
ground  that  the  object  of  the  preposition  is  the  whole 
clause,  "whoever  comes  in."  Others  reasoning  still 
more  closely  would  say  that  the  real  object  is  not  an 
entire  thought  that  can  be  expressed  by  a  clause,  but  a 
person  who  is  merely  described  by  an  adjective  clause 


152  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

• 

that  follows.     The  discrepancy  can  be  entirely  avoided 
by  the  use  of  two  words,  "  Give  it  to  anyone  who  comes 


in.' 


But  there  is  still  another  line  of  reasoning  that  gives 
some  justification  to  the  use  of  whoever.  Who  and  its 
compounds  are  showing  a  tendency  to  become  colorless 
words  as  to  case.  The  grammarian  of  the  future  will 
perhaps  maintain  that  whoever  (like  whichever)  has 
no  case-form,  and  can  for  this  reason  be  both  object  and 
subject  at  the  same  time.  (See  Chapter  54.) 

Which  and  what  and  their  compounds  are  used  also 
as  relative  adjectives,  as,  "Take  what  books  you  like," 
"Take  whichever  books  you  prefer."  In  the  latter 
sentence  whichever  is  a  relative  adjective  equivalent  to 
"those  which,"  and  is  used  to  limit  the  noun  books,  also 
as  the  object  of  prefer,  and  as  the  connective  of  the 
clauses.  Soever  is  sometimes  separated  from  what  in 
this  adjective  use,  as,  "  What  man  soever  he  may  be." 

Certain  adverbs — where,  when,  while  and  a  few 
others — are  freely  used  as  relatives  to  connect  adjective 
clauses  with  the  nouns  which  they  limit,  as,  "This  is 
the  place  where  he  stood."  The  adverb  in  such  a  case 
is  the  equivalent  of  a  prepositional  phrase  containing 
a  relative  pronoun,  as,  "This  is  the  place  at  which  he 
stood."  The  adverb  is  to  be  preferred  in  such  sen- 
tences as  a  rule,  for  a  prepositional  relative  phrase  is 
often  an  awkward  construction. 

The  conjunction  as  is  sometimes  used  with  the  force 
of  a  relative  pronoun  after  such  and  same,  as,  "Take 
such  as  you  prefer,"  i.e.,  "Take  those  which  you  pre- 


Tlie  Relatives  153 

fer."  Than  after  a  comparative  may  take  a  similar 
pronominal  office,  as  subject  or  object,  as,  "More  came 
than  were  asked."  But  is  sometimes  used  as  a  kind  of 
negative  relative,  as,  "  There  is  nobody  but  knows  it," 
i.  e.,  "who  knows  it  not." 

A  relative  pronoun,  though  it  has  no  inflectional 
form,  requires  the  following  verb  or  pronoun  to  conform 
to  the  number,  person  or  gender  of  its  antecedent. 
This  rule  of  agreement  in  a  relative  clause  is  most  fre- 
quently violated  after  anyone,  suck,  every,  neither,  and 
similar  words.  Grammatically  such  expressions  are 
singular  though  the  plural  idea  is  suggested,  as,  "Any- 
one who  injures  his  book  must  replace  it."  The  case 
of  a  relative  is  independent  of  the  antecedent,  and 
is  determined  by  the  relation  of  the  pronoun  in  the 
clause. 


XXXII 
VERBS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPAL  PARTS 

Having  learned  to  distinguish  verbs  from  the  words  be- 
longing to  other  parts  of  speech,  you  will  now  enter  with 
a  clear  head  on  an  inquiry  as  to  the  variations  to  which  the 
words  of  this  part  of  speech  are  liable. — COBBETT'S  GRAM- 
MAR, 1818. 

But  thou,  the  more  he  varies  forms,  beware 
To  strain  his  fetters  with  a  stricter  care. 

— DRYDEN'S  "VIRGIL." 

"There  are  a  few  interesting  survivals  which  resist  all 
tendency  to  uniformity." 

The  large  number  of  verbs,  and  the  almost  unlimited  free- 
dom with  which  we  can  obtain  them  from  other  parts  of 
speech,  is  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  use  made  of  verbs. — 
M.  SCHELE  DE  VERB. 

In  the  Grammar  of  life  the  great  verbs  are  To  Be  and  To 
Do. — JOHN  A.  STEWART. 

The  verb  is  the  only  part  of  speech  which  is  abso- 
lutely essential  to  sentence  formation.  A  subject  may 
be  a  pronoun,  a  phrase  or  a  clause,  as  well  as  a  noun, 
or  it  may  be  omitted,  as  in  imperative  sentences.  But 
if  the  verb  is  lacking  there  is  no  sentence. 

The  office  of  the  verb  is  to  supply  the  asserting  ele- 
ment to  the  predicate.  But  most  verbs  contain  also  the 
idea  to  be  predicated  either  wholly  or  in  part.  Tin 
verb  be,  however,  in  a  general  or  definitive  sentence,  is 

154 


Verbs  and  Their  Principal  Parts  155 

sometimes  pure  verb  and  simply  connects  the  predicated 
idea  to  the  subject,  as,  "God  is  love." 

Verbs  are  either  complete  or  incomplete  on  two  lines 
of  division.  A  verb  is  copulative  or  attributive, 
according  as  it  is  a  copula  for  an  outside  attribute,  as, 
"She  seems  happy,"  or  contains  within  itself  the  chief 
idea  to  be  predicated,  as,  "  He  runs  fast." 

Verbs  are  also  either  transitive  or  intransitive, accord- 
ing as  they  take  an  object  or  are  used  without  an 
object. 

There  is  one  important  class  of  verbs,  known  as  aux- 
iliaries, that  have  some  very  distinct  grammatical 
properties.  (See  Chapter  34.) 

There  are  forms  derived  from  verbs,  called  verbals, 
or  more  definitely,  participles  and  infinitives.  While 
these  retain  some  of  the  meaning  and  modifiers  of  the 
verbs  from  which  they  are  derived,  their  grammatical 
nature  is  that  of  some  other  part  of  speech  rather  than 
that  of  the  true  verb.  (See  Chapters  39,  40  and  41.) 

Verbs  have  a  slight  amount  of  inflection  for  mood, 
tense,  number  and  person.  In  the  two  latter  points 
some  verbal  forms  show  agreement  with  their  sub- 
jects. 

The  student  of  grammar  needs  a  knowledge  of  the 
few  inflectional  forms  that  a  verb  can  take,  and  for 
every  verb  he  needs  to  know  certain  fundamental  forms 
called  the  principal  parts. 

Some  of  the  older  English  verbs  have  distinct  forms 
in  the  present,  past,  and  past  participle,  from  which  all 
the  other  forms  are  regularly  derived,  as  do,  did,  done. 


156  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

From  do  are  derived  the  words  doing,  doest,  dost, 
docth,  doth  and  does;  also  certain  phrases,  as  may  do, 
will  do,  have  been  doing,  etc.  From  the  past  form  did, 
the  form  didst  alone  is  derived.  Done  (called  the  past 
participle  though  never  used  as  a  participle  except  with 
a  passive  meaning)  enters  into  a  large  number  of  verbal 
phrases  both  active  and  passive,  such  as,  has  done9 
will  be  done,  having  done,  etc.  In  order,  therefore,  to 
have  a  mastery  of  the  English  verb,  these  three  forms, 
the  present,  past,  and  past  participle,  must  be  known, 
after  which  all  other  forms  can  be  regularly  made  by 
the  use  of  terminations  or  auxiliaries. 

The  past  and  past  participle  of  many  verbs  are  reg- 
ularly formed  by  adding  ed  to  the  present.  Such  verbs 
are  called  regular  or  weak  verbs,  and  all  new  verbs 
added  to  English  are  regular.  If  all  verbs  were  regular 
there  would  be  no  principal  parts  to  be  studied  in 
grammar.  The  infinitive  or  name  form  of  the  verb 
would  be  all  that  would  need  to  be  given  to  make  its 
forms  available  for  use.  The  principal  parts  that 
require  the  attention  of  grammar  students,  therefore, 
are  those  that  are  formed  in  some  other  way  than  by 
the  ed  termination,  and  these  belong  wholly  to  verbs  of 
the  old  Saxon  vocabulary. 

There  are  a  few  defective  verbs  that  are  lacking  in 
one  or  more  of  their  principal  parts.  Most  of  the  aux- 
iliaries are  of  this  class.  The  verb  be  has  principal  parts 
derived  from  different  roots  and  is  the  most  irregular 
verb  in  English.  Go  also  has  different  roots  in  its 
principal  parts. 


Verbs  and  Their  Principal  Parts  157 

The  classification  of  verbs  according  to  the  method 
of  forming  their  principal  parts  gives  two  great  groups 
whose  forms  represent  the  two  conjugations  of  English 
verbs.  (See  Chapter  33. ) 


XXXIII 

THE    TWO    CONJUGATIONS    OF    ENGLISH 

VERBS 

Language,  like  the  rocks,  is  strewn  with  the  fossilized 
wrecks  of  former  conditions  of  society. — SAYCE. 

"A  frequent  recognition  of  the  historical  element  is  neces- 
sary to  a  true  understanding  of  English  grammar." 

The  dying  out  of  forms  and  sounds  is  looked  upon  by 
etymologists  with  painful  feeling;  but  no  unprejudiced 
judge  will  be  able  to  see  in  it  anything  but  a  progressive 
victory  over  lifeless  material. — KRAUTER. 

The  terms  strong  and  weak  were  first  applied  to  verbs  for 
a  somewhat  fanciful  reason;  the  strong  verbs  were  so  called 
because  they  seemed  to  form  the  preterite  term  out  of  their 
own  resources  without  calling  to  their  aid  any  ending.  The 
weak  verbs  were  so  called  because  they  were  incapable  of 
forming  their  preterites  without  the  aid  of  the  ending  ed, 

dt    Or   t. — KlTTREDQE   AND   ARNOLD. 

The  terms  strong  and  weak  preterites  in  aD  our  better 
grammars  have  put  out  of  use  the  wholly  misleading  terms 
of  irregular  and  regular. — TRENCH. 

A  strong  verb  is  really  just  as  regular  as  a  weak  verb; 
that  is  to  say,  all  strong  verbs  form  their  preterites  in  accord- 
ance with  definite  rules  and  not  in  obedience  to  mere  chance. 
To  ascertain  these  rules,  however,  requires  a  long  study, 
not  merely  of  the  English  language  but  of  several  other 
languages,  like  German  and  the  Scandinavian  tongue,  with 
which  English  is  closely  related.  The  student  who  is  begin, 
ning  the  study  of  English  Grammar,  therefore,  must  learn 
the  forms  of  the  strong  verbs  as  separate  facts,  without 

158 


The  Two  Conjugations  of  Verbs  159 

much  regard  to  the  reasons  for  their  existence. — KITTREDGB 
AND  ARNOLD. 

The  history  of  the  English  verb  is,  from  one  point  of  view, 
the  history  of  a  conflict  between  the  weak  and  the  strong 
conjugations  in  which  the  former  steadily  tended  for  three 
centuries  to  become  the  one  exclusively  in  use.  A  satis- 
factory account  of  the  later  history  of  the  strong  conjugation 
has  been  made  a  task  of  no  slight  difficulty  in  consequence 
of  the  irregularities  that  appear  in  many  verbs,  and  the 
seemingly  capricious  changes  that  have  taken  place  in  their 
inflection  at  different  periods. — LOUNSBURY. 

Verbs  are  divided  according  to  their  manner  of  form- 
ing their  principal  parts  into  two  great  classes,  called 
strong  and  weak  verbs.  The  strong  verbs  form  their 
past  tense  and  sometimes  their  past  participle  by  chang- 
ing the  vowel  of  the  root,  as  sing,  sang,  sung.  They 
take  no  additional  ending  in  the  past  tense.  This  vowel 
change  is  allied  to  the  German  modified  vowel  or  umlaut.  —  **** 
The  past  participle  of  these  verbs  formerly  took  the 
ending  en,  and  this  is  still  found  in  some  of  the  verbs 
of  this  class,  as  tread,  trod,  trodden.  The  form  in  en  is 
sometimes  retained  in  adjective  formations,  after  it  has 
been  dropped  in  the  participial  use,  as  in  misshapen. 

The  weak  verbs  do  not  change  the  vowel  of  the  root, 
but  they  make  the  past  tense  and  the  past  participle  by 
adding  d,  t,  or  ed  to  the  root,  as  spill,  spilled  or  spilt. 
A  few  verbs  that  are  classed  with  weak  verbs  have  also 
a  vowel  change  in  the  past,  as  tell,  told.  In  general,  the 
test  of  a  weak  verb  is  that  is  has  a  d  or  t  in  the  past 
that  does  not  occur  in  the  present. 

The  name  strong  signifies  that  the  verb  makes  its 


100  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

principal  parts  within  its  own  root,  while  the  weak  verbs 
are  incapable  of  this  and  require  the  additional  ending. 
There  seems  to  be  an  affinity  between  strong  and  in- 
transitive verbs,  though  some  of  the  most  common  of 
the  strong  verbs  (as  do  and  see)  are  transitive.  Most  of 
the  transitive  verbs,  however,  are  of  the  weak  type. 

The  names  Old  Conjugation  and  New  Conjugation 
are  also  frequently  given  to  these  two  great  types  of 
verbs.  They  have  also  been  called  (by  Sweet  and  other 
grammarians)  vowel  verbs  and  consonant  verbs.  In 
some  grammars  the  two  great  types  are  called  irregular 
and  regular  verbs.  The  name  regular  is  a  convenient 
one  to  apply  to  the  modern  verbal  forms  that  end 
strictly  in  ed.  Yet  there  are  many  irregularities  in  the 
weak  type  of  verbs.  The  lists  of  irregular  verbs 
given  in  the  older  grammars  include  very  many  that  are 
now  seen  to  belong  to  the  new  or  weak  conjugation. 
The  terms  strong  and  weak  are  more  distinctive  in 
describing  the  type  to  which  a  verb  belongs  than  the 
words  irregular  and  regular. 

The  forms  of  the  strong  verbs  are  also  regular 
according  to  the  principles  of  old  English,  though  not 
made  in  accordance  with  the  present  active  rule  for 
verb  formation. 

Although  the  strong  verbs  are  now  treated  as  one 
conjugation  of  English  verbs,  they  include  various  types 
of  vowel  changes.  They  are  really  the  survivals  of 
several  ancient  Saxon  conjugations  whose  differences 
can  still  be  noted,  and  to  some  extent  classified.  In 
their  past  participles  there  are  three  vowel  types: 


The  Two  Conjugations  0}  Verbs  161 

•j 

First,  like  the  infinitive — come,  came,  come. 
Second,  like  the  past  tense — find,  found,  found. 
Third,  distinct  from  either — sing,  sang,  sung. 

There  is  a  tendency  on  the  part  of  strong  verbs  to 
adopt  newer  and  weak  forms.  Thus  glide  and  creep 
were  formerly  strong  verbs.  In  a  few  verbs  this  change 
has  been  only  partly  accomplished  and  they  are  known 
as  mixed  verbs,  as  swell,  swelled,  swollen.  Weak  verbs 
which  have  also  a  vowel  change  in  the  past  (as  tell,  told; 
seek,  sought)  are  also  a  type  of  mixed  verbs  in  which 
the  two  ways  of  forming  the  preterite  are  combined. 
Both  the  strong  and  weak  forms  of  a  verb  are  often  in 
use,  and  sometimes  with  different  meanings,  as, 

Hang,  hung,  hung. 
Hang,  hanged,  hanged. 

More  than  a  hundred  verbs  originally  strong  have 
passed  over  wholly  or  in  part  to  the  weak  conjugation. 
Also  more  than  a  hundred  strong  verbs  have  dropped 
out  of  the  language  and  weak  verbs  derived  from  the 
Norman-French  have  taken  their  place. 

Of  the  two  forms  of  weak  verbs  in  d  and  t,  the  forms 
in  t  have  usually  been  regarded  as  somewhat  archaic. 
They  have  often  been  used  by  poets,  not  in  the  interests 
of  simplified  spelling  but  because  the  archaic  appearance 
added  poetic  flavor  to  the  verse.  In  verbs  having  both 
forms  in  common  use  the  form  in  t  is  more  frequently 
found  in  participial  relations  than  in  the  past  tense. 
In  some  instances  the  older  participial  form  in  t  has 
become  a  pure  adjective  (as  past,  blest)  thus  gaining  a 
clear  grammatical  distinction  from  the  usual  verb  form. 


162  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

In  not  a  few  weak  verbs  the  forms  spelled  with  d  are 
necessarily  pronounced  with  a  t  sound,  as  grr«.v/W, 
crushed,  etc.  Among  the  three  hundred  words  for 
which  the  Simplified  Spelling  Board  advocate  a  revised 
spelling  there  are  the  past  tenses  of  seventy-three  weak 
verbs  wliich  phonetically  require  t  rather  than  d.  There 
are  some  difficulties  in  the  full  application  of  this  prin- 
ciple. Some  of  these  past  tenses  (as  past,  blest,  rapt, 
rarest)  suggest  to  the  mind  other  words  of  like  spelling. 
A  few  verbs  requiring  the  t  sound  (as  hope  and  hop)  are 
omitted  from  the  list,  probably  because  of  more  com- 
plex ambiguities. 

On  the  whole,  this  return  to  the  original  and  more 
phonetic  verbal  form  has  good  sense  in  its  favor,  and 
for  careful  students  of  pronunciation  the  change  is  not 
difficult  to  make.  Yet  it  can  scarcely  be  expected  that 
persons  trained  in  the  grammars  of  the  last  generation 
(which  spelt  almost  all  weak  verbs  with  d  rather  than  /) 
will  at  present  distinguish  perfectly  between  the  phon- 
etic differences  of  such  verbs  as  lived  and  wisht,  lookt 
and  showed. 

There  are  twenty  or  more  verbs  in  English  which  end 
in  t,  and  have  no  change  for  their  principal  parts,  such 
as  bet,  burst,  cast,  cost,  cut,  bit,  put,  etc.  These  are 
classed  in  the  older  grammars  as  irregular  verbs.  Most 
of  them,  however,  are  really  verbs  of  the  weak  type 
from  which  the  weak  ending  has  dropped  away.  Sev- 
eral of  them,  however,  as  burst  and  let,  are  historically 
allied  to  the  strong  conjugation. 

All  new  verbs  added  to  English  are  of  the  weak  con- 


The  Two  Conjugations  of  Verbs 

jugation.  The  weak  forms  of  verbs  are  by  no  means 
all  new,  however.  Some  of  the  oldest  verbs  in  the 
language  are  of  this  weak  type.  Indeed  the  weak 
conjugation  itself  is  simply  one  of  the  Saxon  conjuga- 
tions which  has  been  adopted  for  all  the  newer  verb 
formations  of  English. 

The  strong  verbs  of  English  are  a  limited  and  dwind- 
ling class,  but  they  add  much  to  die  charm  and  variety 
of  the  language. 

There  are  many  interesting  survivals  of  old  irregular 
verbal  forms  in  the  language  used  by  elderly  people  or 
in  out-of-the-way  localities.  To  find  one  of  these  in  an 
unexpected  quarter  is  a  delight  to  the  antiquarian 
student  of  language.  It  is  also  a  matter  of  interest  to 
notice  how  little  children  unconsciously  form  irregu- 
lar past  tenses  and  participles,  according  to  the  ancient 
pattern,  as,  "If  a  bee  stang  you,  what  would  you  do  ?" 
The  poets  also  with  true  poetic  spirit  are  fond  of  reviving 
these  older  forms,  which  add  much  to  the  poetic  style 
by  their  archaic  flavor. 


XXXIV 
AUXILIARY  VERBS 

The  richness  and  flexibility  of  English  in  its  auxiliary 
forms  is  one  of  its  most  striking  characteristics. — JOYNES. 

When  a  full  verb  is  associated  with  an  auxiliary  it  is  always 
made  into  a  verbal,  so  that  the  function  of  predication  is 
transferred  to  the  auxiliary.  If  more  than  one  auxiliary  is 
used,  only  one  of  these  keeps  its  finite  form;  all  the  others 
are  verbals. — SWEET. 

The  auxiliary  is  always  the  verb  form,  the  finite  predicate; 
to  say  auxiliary  and  verb  is  an  error. — JOYNES. 

Our  auxiliary  verbs  give  us  a  power  which  the  ancients 
with  all  their  varieties  of  mood  and  inflections  of  tense 
could  never  attain. — SOUTHEY. 

There  is  a  small  but  very  important  class  of  verbs 
that  are  not  used  alone  as  complete  predicates  but  are 
combined  with  the  participles  and  infinitives  of  other 
verbs  to  make  verb  phrases.  Most  of  the  so-called 
verbal  inflections  of  voice,  mood,  and  tense  are  made 
in  this  way.  The  final  participle  or  infinitive  in  the 
phrase  expresses  the  principal  idea  and  is  sometimes 
called  the  principal  verb.  Yet  it  is  the  first  auxiliary 
that  has  the  assertive  power  and  is  the  true  finite  verl>. 
Thus  "  may  have  been  done"  is  a  phrase  of  the  verb  do, 
but  the  first  auxiliary  may  is  the  asserting  word. 

But  while  the  auxiliary  retains  the  power  of  predica- 
tion, its  original  meaning  has  been  greatly  modified  and 

164 


Auxiliary  Verbs  165 

is  sometimes  almost  or  entirely  lost  in  the  combined 
verb  form.  The  following  participle  or  infinitive  also 
loses  some  of  its  distinctive  character  in  the  blending  of 
forms.  A  participle  loses  some  of  its  adjective  character 
and  an  infinitive  is  not  preceded  by  to. 

The  amount  of  specialized  meaning  that  is  retained, 
however,  differs  greatly  in  the  different  auxiliaries.  For 
this  reason  they  are  treated  in  very  different  ways  by 
grammarians,  some  of  whom  restrict  the  term  auxiliary 
to  those  having  no  distinctive  meaning  of  their  own,  but 
whose  office  is  entirely  structural  or  functional.  It 
seems  convenient,  however,  to  consider  together  all  the 
verbs  that  have  more  or  less  of  the  auxiliary  character. 

The  verbs  used  as  auxiliaries  are  be,  have,  do,  shall, 
will,  may,  can,  must,  might,  could,  would,  and  should. 

Let,  and  sometimes  also  need  and  dare,  resemble  the 
auxiliaries  in  not  requiring  to  before  the  following 
infinitive.  Ought  retains  to  but  is  similar  in  meaning 
to  some  of  the  auxiliaries,  and  like  them  is  defective  in 
its  principal  parts. 

Be,  have,  do,  and  will  are  used  also  as  principal  verbs 
with  definite  meanings.  They  have  participles  and 
infinitives  of  their  own  and  can  themselves  take  auxil- 
iaries. May  and  can  also  retain  to  some  extent  their 
own  meanings  when  in  combination.  May,  can,  must, 
might,  could,  would,  and  should,  are  often  called  the 
moHaT^TTTtiafieirsince  they  take  the  place  of  a  mood 
inflection.  Must  is  usually  indicative,  expressing 
a  necessary  fact  rather  than  a  contingent  one.  The 


166  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

other  modals  are  potential,  and  some  of  them  are  often 
subjunctive  in  character. 

Be  is  the  most  important  and  most  widely  used  of 
all  the  auxiliaries.  It  occurs  in  all  passive  and  pro- 
gressive verb  phrases.  Have  is  also  very  extended  in  its 
use,  occurring  in  the  perfect  tense  forms,  but  with  its 
original  meaning  almost  wholly  lost.  In  the  older 
English,  be  was  used  with  intransitive  verbs  where  wo 
now  use  have.  The  idiom  is  still  sometimes  used,  as, 
"  I  am  arrived."  Do  as  an  auxiliary  has  lost  its  original 
meaning.  Its  chief  use  is  to  supply  an  auxiliary  to  a 
phrase  that  seems  to  need  one,  either  for  emphasis,  as, 
"  I  did  make  the  effort,"  or  for  reasons  of  word  order, 
as  in  interrogative  and  negative  sentences.  In  the 
older  English,  did  was  often  used  as  an  auxiliary  without 
emphasis,  as,"  The  Serpent  beguiled  me  and  I  did  eat," 
"  It  did  address  itself  to  motion." — HAMLET. 

The  use  of  auxiliaries  is  a  modern  form  of  language 
growth.  It  is  most  highly  developed  in  English.  Ger- 
man and  the  other  Teutonic  languages,  however,  have 
similar  sets  of  modal  auxiliaries,  though  these  differ 
considerably  from  those  of  English  in  their  idiomatic 
usages. 

Auxiliaries  have  been  one  of  the  most  potent  factors 
in  the  change  of  English  from  an  inflectional  to  a 
highly  analytic  language.  They  give  great  freedom 
and  wide  range  of  expression  and  also  furnish  many 
of  the  idiomatic  mysteries  that  make  English  difficult 
to  foreigners.  The  study  of  the  auxiliaries  gives  a 
large  and  interesting  field  for  philological  investigation. 


XXXV 
VERB  PHRASES 

What  is  the  use  of  teaching  the  child  that  successions 
of  words,  each  of  which  has  its  own  meaning,  and  any  two 
of  which  may  be  separated  at  pleasure  by  the  introduction 
of  other  words,  each  of  which  has  also,  no  more  and  no  less, 
its  own  meaning,  are  voices,  moods,  and  tenses? — RICHARD 
GRANT  WHITE. 

A  conjugation  of  the  verb  can  hardly  be  said  to  exist. 
We  have  laid  aside  not  only  the  passive  and  middle  voice, 
the  optative  and  other  moods  of  Greek  verbs,  but  we  have 
abandoned  also  the  many  tenses  of  the  Latin  verb  which 
the  Romance  languages  still  retain.  And  after  thus  strip- 
ping the  verb  of  all  power  to  express  tense  and  mood  the 
tendency  of  our  day  is  to  free  it  more  and  more  even  of  its 
connection  with  person. — M.  SCHELE  DE  VERB. 

We  should  draw  a  distinct  line  between  the  genuine  in- 
flection of  the  verb  and  those  verbal  phrases,  "compound 
forms,"  by  which  the  scheme  of  conjugation  is  in  part  filled 
up. — WHITNEY. 

The  amount  of  true  inflection  that  belongs  to  the 
verb  in  English  is  exceedingly  small.  There  are  in- 
flectional changes  for  the  past  tense,  the  third  person 
singular  of  the  present  tense,  and  each  of  the  two  parti- 
ciples. There  are  ancient  forms  used  with  the  subject 
thou  in  all  the  modes  and  tenses.  If  we  add  several 
irregularities  of  the  verb  be  we  have  well-nigh  covered 
the  true  inflection  of  English  verbs. 

167 


168  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

To  state  the  same  thought  in  another  way:  An 
English  verb — with  the  one  exception  of  the  verb  be — 
can  have  only  eight  distinct  forms,  as,  write,  writest, 
writeth,  writes,  writing,  wrote,  wrotest,  written.  Three 
of  these  (writest,  writeth,  and  wrotest)  are  practically 
obsolete.  In  regular  verbs  only  four  forms  are  in 
common  use,  as,  sail,  sails,  sailing,  sailed. 

Most  of  the  so-called  verb-forms  are  phrases  made  by 
uniting  participles  and  infinitives  with  the  auxiliary 
verbs.  In  any  verb  phrase  the  first  word  has  the  asser- 
tive power  and  is  the  true  verb,  though  the  last  word 
expresses  the  most  significant  idea  and  gives  the  name 
to  the  phrase.  Thus,  "I  have  seen"  is  a  phrase  of 
see,  but  have  is  the  asserting  word.  The  phrase 
can  also  be  separated  by  adverbial  words  which  are 
no  part  of  the  phrase  but  have  their  own  distinct  mean- 
ing and  use,  as,  "  He  will  probably  be  elected." 

The  method  of  the  older  grammars  in  conjugating  a 
verb  with  various  subjects  through  all  the  phrase  forms 
of  the  moods  and  tenses  had  little  value  as  a  school 
exercise.  Pupils  should  be  able,  however,  to  recognize 
all  the  classes  of  verb  phrases.  These  may  be  grouped 
as  follows: 
Passive — formed  by  the  auxiliary  be  with  the  past 

participle. 
Perfect — known  by   the  auxiliary  have  and  found  in 

both  voices. 

Future — having  the  auxiliary  will  or  shall. 
Potential — known   by  the  potential  auxiliaries,   may, 
can,  must,  might,  could,  would,  and  should. 


Verb  Phrases  169 

Progressive — formed  by  the  present  participle  with  the 

auxiliary  be. 
Emphatic   or   Interrogative — containing   the   auxiliary 

do,  and  found  in  the  present  and  past  tenses. 

Students  should  be  able  to  name  verb  phrases,  ap- 
plying these  terms.  Thus  "shall  have  been  seen  "is  a 
future  perfect  passive  verb  phrase.  "May  have  been 
running"  is  a  perfect  potential  progressive  verb  phrase. 

Although  most  of  the  verb  phrases  are  formed  after 
some  regular  pattern  of  a  given  voice,  mood  or  tense, 
idiomatic  phrases  of  more  or  less  irregularity  are  of 
frequent  occurrence.  There  are  intransitive  forms 
with  the  verb  be,  as,  "He  is  gone,"  "The  tower  is 
fallen,"  also  progressive  phrases  of  passive  meaning, 
as,  "The  house  is  building,"  and  "The  house  is  being 
built." 

Many  other  irregular  verb  phrases  are  also  in  use,  as, 
"  I  was  going  to  do  it,"  "  I  am  about  to  write,"  "  This  is 
to  be  seen."  The  power  to  make  new  verb  combina- 
tions is  very  largely  developed  in  English. 

For  ordinary  purposes  of  classification  a  verb  phrase 
may  be  treated  as  a  whole.  Yet  the  practice  of  looking 
at  each  word  in  its  individual  relations  is  also  of  value. 
A  full  knowledge  of  the  grammatical  structure  requires 
that  the  student  should  sometimes  analyze  the  phrase 
completely.  In  the  sentence,  "He  might  have  been 
seen,"  the  verb  phrase  may  be  analyzed  as  follows: 
This  is  a  perfect  potential  passive  phrase  of  the  verb 
see.  "Might"  is  the  true  verb.  "Have"  is  an  in- 
finitive, originally  the  object  of  "might."  "Been"  is 


170  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

the  past  participle  of  be.  "Might  have  been"  is  a 
copulative  phrase  connecting  the  past  participle  "seen" 
with  the  subject. 

A  synopsis  of  verb  phrases,  including  one  form  for 
each  mood  and  tense,  gives  a  good  general  view  of  the 
verbal  forms,  and  is  useful  in  comparing  English  verbs 
with  those  of  other  languages. 


XXXVI 

THE  MODAL  AUXILIARIES 

Six  little  words  do  claim  me  every  day, 

Shall,  must,  and  can,  with  will  and  ought  and  may,  ' 

Shall  is  the  law  within  inscribed  by  heaven, 

The  goal  to  which  I  by  myself  am  driven, 

Must  is  the  bound  not  to  be  over-past, 

Where  by  the  world  and  Nature  I'm  held  fast. 

Can  is  the  measure  of  my  personal  dower 

Of  deed  and  art,  science,  and  practised  power. 

Will  is  my  noblest  crown,  my  brightest,  best, 

Freedom's  own  seal  upon  my  soul  imprest, 

Ought  the  inscription  on  the  seal  set  fair, 

On  Freedom's  open  door,  a  bolt  'tis  there. 

And  lastly  May,  'mong  many  courses  mixed 

The  vaguely  possible  by  the  moment  fixed. 

Shall,  Must,  and  Can,  with  Will  and  Ought  and  May, 

These  are  the  six  that  claim  me  every  day. 

Only  when  God  doth  teach,  do  I  know  what  each  day 

I  shall,  I  must,  I  can,  I  will,  I  ought,  I  may. 

— TRANSLATION  FROM  THE  GERMAN  FOR  The  School  Journal. 

The  Modals,  can,  may,  must,  shall,  will,  show  special  de- 
fects of  verb  forms.  They  have  no  personal  endings,  no 
infinitive,  no  participle,  and  hence  no  compound  tenses, 
except  by  special  idiomatic  phrase  (can  have  done,  etc.). 
They  cause  special  difficulty  in  the  study  of  other  languages 
where  such  forms  are  relatively  complete  and  regular,  the 
difficulty  being  chiefly  in  the  English  idiom.  This  is  per- 
haps the  chief  difficulty  in  English. — JOYNES. 

A  mere  declaration  of  ability  is  indicative  in  mood.     To 

171 


172  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

term  this  potential  would  be  parallel  to  asserting  that  "there 
are  thirty  sheep  in  the  pasture"  is  in  the  thirty-steep  mood. 
If,  however,  the  assertion  of  ability  is  made  doubtfully,  it 
goes  into  the  subjunctive  not  because  it  is  an  assertion  of 
doubtful  ability,  but  because  it  is  an  assertion  of  ability 
made  doubtfully. — DAVENPORT  AND  EMERSON. 

Whether  we  call  the  contingent  mood  potential  or  sub- 
junctive is  not  material. — BROWN  AND  DEGARMO. 

There  is  an  interesting  group  of  verbal  phrases  in 
English  with  wide  diversity  of  meanings,  which  are 
variously  expressed  in  other  languages  by  the  condi- 
tional, optative,  obligative,  and  subjunctive 
moods.  In  English  these  phrases  have  often  been 
classed  together  as  a  potential  mood.  The  German 
language  is  nearly  allied  to  the  English  in  having  a  set 
of  verb  phrases  with  modal  auxiliaries  that  are  similar 
to  our  own.  The  two  languages  differ  widely,  how- 
ever, in  the  subtler  shades  of  meaning  which  these 
can  convey. 

But  the  English  potential  forms  are  rapidly  being 
withdrawn  from  classification  as  a  distinct  mood. 
They  are  always  used  with  either  an  indicative  or  a 
subjunctive  force,  and  may  always  be  classed  in  one  of 
these  moods.  Yet  it  is  often  convenient  to  treat  this 
class  of  phrases  together,  under  the  name  potential 
phrases,  even  if  these  are  not  called  a  distinct  mood 
of  the  verb. 

The  chief  modal  auxiliaries  are  the  present  and  past 
1-  uses  of  the  defective  verbs,  may,  can,  shall,  and  will. 
The  present  tenses  of  shall  and  will  are  also  the  aux- 
iliaries of  the  future  tense,  and  arc  commonly  called 


The  Modal  Auxiliaries  173 

the  future  auxiliaries.  Yet  the  second  form  of  the 
future  (used  to  express  will  power  or  compulsion)  is 
as  truly  a  modal  form  as  any  of  the  phrases  which  are 
called  potential. 

Ought,  must,  dare,  let,  need  (and  a  few  others),  have 
some  similarity  with  these  in  meaning  and  use. 

Ought,  originally  the  past  tense  of  owe,  differs  from 
the  others  in  that  it  requires  to  with  the  following 
infinitive,  thus  making  a  less  compact  verb  phrase. 
Let  is  used  in  the  imperative  to  produce  a  kind  of 
third  or  first  person,  as  "  Let  him  go,"  "  Let  us  go." 

It  is  interesting  for  the  grammar  student  to  search 
through  the  older  literature  for  instances  where  poten- 
tial words  are  used  as  principal  verbs,  and  in  their 
original  sense,  as 

I  will  no  reconcilement. — HAMLET. 

I  would  that  thou  wert  cold  or  hot. — BIBLE. 

What  can  man's  wisdom 

In  the  restoring  his  bereaved  sense? — KING  LEAR. 

May  is  sometimes  used  with  the  force  of  must,  as 
Whose  loves  I  may  not  drop. — MACBETH. 

In  negative  sentences  cannot  is  generally  used  rather 
than  may  not,  as  "May  I  go  to  the  city?"  "No,  you 
cannot  go  to-day.  You  may  go  next  week." 

An  ancient  form  of  might  was  mought,  as 

That  mought  not  be  distinguished. — SHAKSPEARE. 

Might,  could,  would,  and  should  are  often  used  sub- 
junctively,  especially  since  the  older  subjunctives  have 


174  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

mostly  disappeared.     Yet  the  older  literature  also  has 
many  potential  phrases  used  as  subjunctives,  as 

Would  I  might  but  ever  see  that  man. — THE  TEMPEST. 

O,  could  I  speak  the  matchless  worth. — OLD  HYMN. 

O,  that  deceit  should  steal  such  gentle  shapes! — KINO 
RICHARD  III. 

If  an  angel  should  have  come  to  me 

And  told  me  Hubert  should  put  out  my  eyes 

I  would  not  have  believed  him. — KING  JOHN. 

Should  is  especially  the  subjunctive  auxiliary.  (See 
Chapter  38.) 

The  potential  phrases  are  sometimes  classed  as  pres- 
ent and  past,  according  to  the  tense  form  of  the  auxiliary 
itself.  There  are  also  present  perfect  and  past  perfect 
tense  forms,  made  by  adding  have  to  the  other  aux- 
iliaries. Yet  the  time  signification  does  not  usually 
correspond  with  these  names.  When  used  as  sub- 
junctives these  auxiliaries  often  refer  to  future  time. 
In,  "  How  could  I  thus  forget  myself  yesterday  ?"  could 
is  indicative  and  refers  to  past  time  as  the  tense  form 
indicates.  But  in  "How  could  I  atone  to-morrow  for 
the  fault  of  yesterday?"  could  is  subjunctive,  and  re- 
fers to  future  time.  An  interesting  contrast  between 
indicative  and  subjunctive  uses  of  auxiliaries  is  shown 
in  the  following : 

"  Look,  what  I  will  not,  that  I  cannot  do." 

"  But  might  you  do't,  and  do  the  world  no  wrong?" 

To  obtain  complete  command  of  the  modal  auxil- 
iaries is  one  of  the  most  difficult  tasks  for  the  foreign 


The  Modal  Auxiliaries  175 

student  of  English.  It  is  only  by  long  usage  and  care- 
ful discrimination  that  he  learns  to  grasp  all  the  deli- 
cate distinctions  which  the  " native  born"  seem  to  ar- 
rive at  almost  intuitively. 

The  idiomatic  mysteries  of  the  potential  phrases  are 
increasing  in  number  as  the  evolution  of  language 
gives  new  occasions  for  the  use  of  these  auxiliaries. 
The  intricacies  have  never  all  been  formulated  in  gram- 
matical statements  and  cannot  be,  but  by  a  careful 
comparison  of  the  potential  forms  in  literature  a  feel- 
ing of  the  "genius  of  the  language"  in  respect  to  their 
use  can  be  cultivated. 


XXXVII 

SHALL  AND  WILL,  SHOULD  AND  WOULD 

In  the  first  person  simply  shall  foretells, 
In  will  a  threat  or  else  a  promise  dwells, 
Shall  in  the  second  and  the  third  doth  threat, 
WiU  simply  then  foretells  a  future  feat. 

— QUATRAIN  FOUND  IN  AN  OLD  GRAMMAR. 
It  must  be  admitted  that  there  is  no  absolute  rule  (for 
shall  and  will)  given  by  any  grammarian  that  will  apply  to 
all  cases  without  leaving  room  for  doubt. — M.  SCHELE  DE 
VERB. 

Learn  to  say,  "I  shall,  I  should,  we  shall,  we  should." 
This  rule  guards  the  switch,  where  pupils  most  easily  get  off 
the  track. — TOLMAN. 

"English-speaking  people  of  Celtic  origin  are  seldom  per- 
fect in  these  idiomatic  usages.  An  educated  Celt  would  not 
indeed  be  guilty  of  the  Hibernianism  "Will  I  do  it?"  Yet 
even  Sir  Walter  Scott  sometimes  showed  his  Scotch  national- 
ity in  his  use  of  would  and  should.1* 

The  distinction  in  the  use  of  shall  and  will  in  forming  the 
future  tense  is  less  carefully  observed  by  intelligent  writers 
and  speakers  of  to-day  than  it  was  by  those  of  the  middle 
of  the  nineteenth  century  or  earlier. — SOUTHWORTH. 

The  exact  and  forcible  use  of  these  two  words  is  one  of  the 
niceties  of  English  style — a  nicety  that  not  only  furnishes 
a  peculiar  difficulty  to  foreigners  but  is  also  a  stumbling- 
block  to  the  great  majority  of  those  whose  mother-tongue 
is  English. — BLACKBURN. 

Historically,  shall  is  the  more  ancient  and  universal,  will 
the  more  modern  and  at  least  primarily  more  rare  peri- 

176 


Shall  and  Will,  Should,  and  Would  177 

phrastic  form.  With  some  weakening  of  both,  the  primitive 
meaning  has  not  perished.  The  glimmering  through  of  the 
latter  gives  to  the  modern  tongue  on  the  one  hand  occasion 
to  avoid  ambiguity,  on  the  other  to  express  more  delicate 
shades  of  thought  apart  from  the  conventional  distribution 
of  the  auxiliary  verbs  among  the  several  persons. — TRANS- 
LATED FROM  MATZNER. 

The  great  Shibboleth  of  modern  speech; — the  peculiar 
use  of  the  auxiliaries  will  and  shall. — JAMIESON. 

In  the  oldest  English  there  was  no  distinct  form  for  \ 
the  future  tense,  its  place  being  supplied  by  the  present. 
This  usage  is  still  found  in  modern  English,  as  "He 
goes  (or  is  going)  to  town  to-morrow."  But  from  the 
thirteenth  century  shall  and  will  have  been  in  com- 
mon use  to  denote  future  time.  These  words  are  used, 
however,  as  modal  auxiliaries,  as  well  as  signs  of 
futurity,  and  various  grammatical  distinctions  must  be 
observed  regarding  them. 

In  simple  prediction  (the  true  future  tense)  the  aux- 
iliaries are  used  in  the  following  order  for  the  three 
persons :  I  shall,  you  will,  he  will. 

To  express  the  speaker's  determination  (the  most 
common  modal  use)  the  order  is  as  follows:  I  will, 
you  shall,  he  shall. 

In  expressing  the  determination  of  another  person 
one  uses  the  same  auxiliary  that  the  person  himself 
would  use,  as 

He  means  that  I  shall  go. 

He  will  do  it,  and  I  cannot  help  it. 

In  expressing  mere  futurity  by  indirect  speech,  usage 


178  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

varies.     Sometimes  the  auxiliaries   follow    the    usual 
agreement  of  persons,  as 

He  seems  to  think  that  I  shall  be  the  last  to  leave. 

You  hope  that  you  will  be  elected. 

But  there  are  cases  where  such  use  would  convey 
ideas  not  intended.  Thus,  "You  say  that  I  shall 
regret  it"  gives  the  idea  of  compulsion.  "He  says 
that  he  will  go"  gives  the  idea  of  promise  or  purpose. 

In  most  cases,  to  express  another's  thought,  for  sim- 
ple futurity  as  well  as  purpose,  we  use  the  same  auxil- 
iary that  he  himself  would  use.  As 

You  hope  that  I  will  succeed. 

He  fears  that  he  shall  be  misunderstood. 

He  fears  that  you  will  be  misunderstood. 

Yet  no  absolute  rule  can  be  given  that  will  cover  all 
cases  of  indirect  speech.  Common  sense,  or  the  speak- 
er's sense  of  idiom  must  be  the  final  arbiter  in  many 
cases. 

In  questions,  mere  futurity  is  usually  expressed  by, 
Shall  I?  Shall  you?  Will  he?  "Shall  he?"  asks 
for  authority.  "Will  you  ?"  asks  for  a  promise.  Will 
is  not  used  with  the  first  person  in  interrogative  sen- 
tences. 

The  forms  in  common  use  may  be  summarized  as 
follows: 

Pure  future  I  shall  be  invited  of  course. 

in  a          You  will  be  invited  of  course. 
statement.     He  will  be  invited  of  course. 
Pure  future  Shall  I  be  invited? 

in  a          Shall  you  be  invited? 
question.      Will  he  be  invited? 


Shatt  and  Will,  Should  and  Would  179 

I  will  have  my  own  way. 
Volition.       You  will  have  your  own  way. 
He  will  have  his  own  way. 

I  will  pay  you  to-morrow. 
Promise.       You  shall  be  paid  to-morrow. 

He  shall  be  paid  to-morrow. 
Compulsion   He  says  that  I  shall  do  it. 

or          Thou  shalt  not  steal. 
Command.   He  shall  suffer  for  this. 

The  most  common  mistake  in  usage  is  in  the  first 
person,  and  consists  in  using  will  when  no  special  voli- 
tion, but  mere  futurity,  is  to  be  expressed,  as  "I  will 
probably  be  there."  The  checking  of  this  tendency 
in  those  who  have  a  weak  sense  of  idiom  is  a  practical 
part  of  the  teacher's  work. 

Yet  there  are  instances  where  only  a  slight  element 
of  volition  or  purpose  is  intended;  and  in  these  cases 
persons  of  unlike  temperaments  may  differ  in  their 
choice  of  the  auxiliary.  A  person  of  straightforward, 
positive  nature,  may  say  "will,"  where  one  with  a 
more  suave  or  yielding  disposition  prefers  "shall"',  as 
" I  will  be  there  if  the  weather  is  fine";  or,  "I  shall  be 
there  if  the  weather  is  fine." 

HISTORICAL   CHANGES   IN    USE 

The  foregoing  statements  cover  the  important  prac- 
tical rules  regarding  shall  and  will.  Yet  students  will 
be  aided  in  keeping  these  grammatical  distinctions  by 
noting  the  original  meaning  of  the  words,  and  know- 
ing something  of  their  history  as  signs  of  the  future 
tense.  For  the  benefit  of  those  who  would  enter  more 


180  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

deeply  into  this  difficult  subject,  some  account  of  the 
historical  change  in  usage  is  here  appended. 

Shall  mean^f  Jo  owe,  to  be  obliged,  and  its  subject 
usually  names  one  who  is  controlled  by  outside  in- 
fluence. The  original  idea  in  shall  was  more  of  duty 
than  of  command.  Chaucer  used  the  word  in  the 
original  sense :  "  For  by  the  faith  I  shal  to  God,  etc." 

A  curious  outgrowth  of  the  meaning  of  shall  is  found 
in  the  word  "Shilly-shally,"  which  is  applied  to  the 
action  of  one  who  cannot  make  up  his  mind,  but  asks 
continually,  "Shall  I?"  "Shall  I?"  The  word  may 
perhaps  be  traced  to  an  old  sentence  from  Congreve: 
"I  don't  stand  shill— I— shall— I;  if  I  say't,  I'll  do't." 

Will  means  to  determine,  and  its  subject  originally 
named  one  who  controlled  the  action.  The  primary 
sense  of  the  two  words  is  closely  followed  in  a  sentence 
by  Gibbon:  "If  you  will  call,  my  servant  shall  show 
you  the  book." 

It  will  be  seen  that  neither  of  the  two  words  is  entirely 
colorless  as  a  mere  future  auxiliary.  The  idea  of  voli- 
tion in  will,  and  that  of  compulsion  in  shall,  argue 
against  such  use.  The  German  language  is  fortunate 
in  having  an  auxiliary  werden,  that  can  express  mere 
becoming  without  any  extraneous  idea. 

While  the  original  meanings  of  shall  and  will  greatly 
affect  their  use  in  modern  English,  the  words  vary  very 
much  in  their  force,  and  sometimes  seem  to  be  used 
without  any  special  force.  Thus  will  in  the  third 
person,  unless  emphasized,  is  entirely  void  of  any 
meaning  except  that  of  a  mere  future,  as 


Shall  and  Will,  Should  and  Would  181 

*  •} 

"Christmas  will  soon  be  here." 

It  may  even  be  used  without  the  sense  of  futurity. 
Thus,  "  He  will  often  go  to  the  river  at  the  hour  of  sun- 
set," denotes  a  customary,  rather  than  a  future  action. 

Yet,  in  spite  of  the  modern  weakening  of  the  idea  of 
volition  in  will,  the  general  verdict  of  English-speaking 
people  has  usually  been  that  shall  is  less  inconsistent 
than  will  with  the  pure  future  meaning.  The  idea  of 
compulsion  includes  that  of  fate  or  destiny,  and  a  pre- 
destined  event  is  not  very  different  from  a  future  event.  v  , 
At  a  very  early  date  shall  began  to  lose  its  original  3f  ( 
meaning,  its  inflectional  forms,  and  its  use  as  a  princi-  %-  < 
pal  verb.  Will,  on  the  other  hand,  is  still  in  use  as  an J  *\ 
independent  verb  with  past  tense  and  participial  forms, 
and  in  its  auxiliary  use  the  original  idea  is  more  dis-  / 

tinctly  retained  than  is  the  case  with  shall.  At  a  very 
early  date  shall  became  the  common  future  auxiliary 
except  for  cases  where  volition  was  to  be  expressed.  -^ 

But  there  is  also  some  counter  argument  to  this     £   ( 
preference  for  shall.     In  both  the  second  and  third  - 
persons  the  compulsive  idea  proves  a  bar  to  the  use  of 
shall  as  a  mere  future  auxiliary.     So  a  rule  prescribing     ^ 
such  use  presents  the  curious  phenomenon  of  having     i 
the  exceptions  twice  as  numerous  as  the  regular  cases; 
and  for  all  these  exceptions  will  is  the  auxiliary  em- 
ployed.    Also,  since  a  voluntary  choice  is  likely  to  be 
carried  out,  will  at  an  early  day  began  to  be  employed 
not  only  when  choice  was   intended,  but   sometimes 
when  little  or  no  volition  was  really  exercised. 

There   have   therefore   always   been   two   opposing 


182  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

lines  of  thinking,  each  having  some  foundation  in 
reason.  Although  the  one  giving  will  the  right  of  way 
in  cases  of  doubt  has  never  been  generally  sustained 
by  scholars,  certain  modern  writers  on  grammar 
have  openly  favored  it.  (See  Ramsey's  Grammar. 
Putnam's  Sons.  1892.) 

I  will,  they  tell  us,  is  more  direct  and  frank 
than  I  shall.  Shall,  they  would  say,  is  an  im- 
perious word.  Let  us  not  use  shall  when  a  better 
word  can  be  found.  So  they  would  make  the  volun- 
tary future  "I  will  arise  and  go  to  my  father,  the 
common  future,  reserving  the  involuntary  future,  as, 
"I  shall  go  to  him,  but  he  shall  not  return  to  me," 
for  those  cases  where  lack  of  volition  is  conspicuous. 

Although  this  position  has  never  been  endorsed  by 
most  grammarians,  it  is  supported  by  a  considerable 
amount  of  current  usage.  The  people  of  Scotland  and 
Ireland  often  use  "I  will"  where  grammarians  would 
say  "I  shall."  And  in  different  sections  of  America 
to-day  people  variously  say  "I  will  be  in  Cleveland 
to-morrow,"  or,  "I  shall  be  in  Boston  to-morrow." 

Professor  Tolman,  of  Chicago,  has  suggested  that 
the  large  German  element  in  the  population  of  the 
Western  States,  may  partly  account  for  the  fact  that 
will  and  would  have  become  in  some  localities  the 
words  of  all  work. 

In  the  historical  development  of  the  English  lan- 
guage there  have  been  some  curious  and  marked 
changes  in  the  usage  of  these  words  at  different  periods; 
but  the  history  clearly  shows  that  shall  has,  at  least  his- 


Shall  and  Will,  Should  and  Would  183 

torically,  the  right  to  be  considered  the  primary  auxiliary 
in  pure  future  phrases.  The  changes  in  use  have 
been  carefully  traced  in  a  pamphlet  by  Prof.  F.  A. 
Blackburn,  of  Chicago,  entitled  The  English  Future; 
Its  Origin  and  Development.  Leipsic  (1882). 

Before  the  Norman  Conquest  shall  and  will  were 
occasionally  used,  but  only  in  their  original  meaning. 
A  little  later,  phrases  began  to  appear  in  a  sense 'ap- 
proaching that  of  the  future  tense,  but  shall  occurs 
more  often  than  will.  By  the  thirteenth  century  the 
new  future  phrase  had  mostly  superseded  the  old 
present  tense  usage. 

But  for  more  than  a  century  shall  became  more  and 
more  the  prevailing  word.  In  some  writings  of  the 
fourteenth  century  it  is  three  or  four  times  as  frequent 
as  will.  It  is  used  in  all  persons,  but  especially  in  the 
second  and  third  persons.  In  the  third  person  shall 
seems  to  have  been  nearly  twelve  times  as  frequent  as 
will.  The  latter  auxiliary,  when  found,  is  almost 
always  in  the  first  person,  where  a  sense  of  volition 
can  easily  be  understood,  though  it  is  often  difficult 
to  determine  how  much  volition  it  was  intended  to 
express. 

During  the  fourteenth  century  people  began  to  see 
a  logical  consistency  in  the  use  of  will  for  the  future, 
especially  as  offering  a  distinction  from  the  compul- 
sive force  of  shall  in  the  second  and  third  persons.  So 
the  floodtide  of  shall  was  gradually  in  a  measure  swept 
away  by  an  influx  of  will. 

In  the  time  of  Wycliffe,  shall  was  at  its  height  as  the 


184  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 


future  auxiliary,  though  in  Wycliffe's  gospels  will 
urs  sometimes  with  an  indefinite  future  force. 
T^mdale's  version  shows  an  increase  in  the  number 
of  times  will  is  used.  But  this  increase  is  mostly  in 
the  first  person,  showing  the  gradual  establishment 
of  two  forms  in  the  first  person,  a  mere  future,  and 
a  voluntary  future.  In  Tyndale's  Testament,  shall 
is  still  the  ordinary  word  in  the  third  person  future. 
Our  common  version  of  the  Bible  is  founded  largely 
on  Tyndale's  version,  and  in  it  "I  shall"  is  a  very  un- 
common phrase.  Yet  the  Bible  abounds  in  shall 
phrases  for  ah1  future  events,  as 

"It  shall  come  to  pass  in  the  last  days,  etc." 
"Nation  shall  rise  against  nation." 
"Neither  shall  they  learn  war  any  more." 
"Thou  shalt  endure,  and  thy  years  shall  not  fail." 

This  use  of  shall  in  the  third  person,  though  orig- 
inally an  ordinary  future  (to  be  replaced  mostly  by  will 
in  a  later  age),  has  been  called  by  modern  grammarians 
the  "shall  of  prophecy." 

Even  after  will  had  to  some  degree  supplanted  shall, 
Shakespeare  and  later  writers  continued  to  use  shall 
in  all  three  persons  to  denote  inevitable  futurity,  as 

My  country  shall  have  more  vices  than  it  had  before.  — 
MACBETH. 

Whoever  shall  practice  physicke  not  having  these  afore- 
said sciences  shall  kill  more  than  he  shall  save.  —  BREVIARY 
OF  HEALTH.  1575. 

Sir  Thomas  More,  in  one  sentence  declares  six  times 


Shall  and  Will,  Should  and  Would          185 

that  Christ  "shall"  do  certain  specified  things. 

The  "shall  of  prophecy"  is  still  to  be  found  in 
modern  English,  and  poets  continue  to  use  shall  in 
some  cases  where  the  prose  writers  say  will. 

It  seems  evident  that  in  the  historical  development 
of  future  forms  it  was  shall  that  first  lost  its  original 
meaning  and  became  the  future  auxiliary,  afterwards 
dividing  the  ground  with  will  in  the  first  person,  so  as 
to  enrich  the  language  with  two  forms,  a  pure  future, 
and  a  mixed,  or  indefinite  future  in  that  person.  It 
was  at  a  much  later  date  that  will,  having  become 
weakened  in  force,  replaced  shall  as  a  pure  future 
for  the  second  and  third  persons,  leaving  to  shall  its 
original  modal  office  of  expressing  compulsive  action. 

A  very  different  explanation  of  the  shall  and  will 
usages  has,  however,  found  its  way  into  modern  thought. 
It  is  sometimes  said  that  "the  extreme  modesty  of 
modern  times"  forbids  the  use  of  "I  will,"  except  in 
extraordinary  circumstances,  as  expressing  too  much 
self-assertion.  "I  shall,"  however,  gives  us  a  phrase 
by  which  we  may  shirk  all  responsibility.  In  other 
words  we  are  permitted  to  say  "I  shall,"  and  avoid 
the  question  of  egoism  suggested  by  "I  will,"  since 
the  speaker  is  merely  the  humble  instrument  of 
events. 

The  fallacy  in  this  reasoning  is  that  "I  will"  is 
assumed  to  be  the  original  and  natural  first  person 
future,  whereas  we  have  seen  that  this  is  not  the  case. 

But  while  this  cannot  be  taken  as  the  explanation  of 
our  future  phrase  forms,  the  principle  here  suggested 


186  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

throws  some  light  upon  certain  delicate  points  of 
modern  usage. 

The  principles  to  be  employed,  it  may  be  said,  are 
not  merely  those  of  grammar,  but  also  of  politeness. 
Will  in  the  first  person  must  always  have  a  touch  of 
volition,  and  shall  in  the  second  person  gives  emphasis 
to  authority.  But  courtesy  demands  that  both  au- 
thority and  self-assertion  be  avoided  whenever  need- 
less. The  person  in  command  does  well  to  say,  not 
"You  shall,"  but  "You  will  please  do  this";  as  if 
predicting  that  it  will  please  you  to  do  it  of  your  own 
accord.  The  euphemism  deceives  no  one.  '  You  will 
please"  is  known  to  be  "merely  the  glove  that  covers 
the  hand  of  power."  But  we  like  the  princes  and 
potentates  better  if  they  make  their  authority  unob- 
trusive. So  the  conventional  form  for  a  military  order 
has  become,  "You  will  report  to  the  headquarters  of 
the  commanding  general,"  etc. 

Without  denying  the  true  history  of  the  idiom  of 
the  future  tense,  one  may  agree  in  a  sense  with  the 
thought  expressed  by  Archbishop  Hare,  that  "  the  pres- 
ent law  of  the  future  may  be  interpreted  on  ethical 
grounds.  When  speaking  in  the  first  person  we  speak 
submissively,  but  in  the  second  and  third  persons  we 
speak  courteously." 

As  a  delicate  application  of  the  same  principle  in 
interrogative  sentences,  it  is  sometimes  felt  that  "Shall 
you?"  belittles  the  person  addressed  by  assuming  that 
he  has  no  volition  in  his  own  acts.  "  Will  you  ?"  how- 
ever, gives  the  appearance  of  a  request.  But  if  anyone 


Shall  and   Will,   Should  and  Would         187 

considers  these  two  forms  as  the  opposing  horns  of  a 
dilemma,  he  has  the  alternative  of  falling  back  upon 
another  interrogative  form  that  is  more  colorless  than 
either.  Instead  of  saying  "  Shall  you  be  at  the  meeting 
to-night?"  or  "Will  you  be  at  the  meeting  to-night?" 
we  may  use  the  present  tense  as  in  Old  English,  and 
say,  "Are  you  going  to  the  meeting  to-night  ?" 

SHOULD   AND    WOULD 

The  intricate  principles  that  govern  the  use  of  shall 
and  will  are  applicable  also  to  should  and  would.  Yet 
these  latter  words  have  some  additional  distinctions 
that  are  all  their  own  and  that  make  the  uncertainties 
even  greater  than  those  of  shall  and  will. 

Should  and  would  are  primarily  the  past  tenses  of 
shall  and  will,  as, 

I  think  I  shall. 

I  thought  I  should. 

I  think  I  will. 

I  thought  I  would. 

But  should  (far  more  than  shall)  retains  the  original 
idea  of  ought.  "You  should  do  it"  means  "You  ought 
to  do  it." 

Perhaps  the  most  important  use  of  should,  however, 
is  in  such  conditional  clauses  as  "Should  you  do  so, 
you  will  regret  it."  In  modern  English  conditional 
clauses  with  should  have  largely  taken  the  place  of  the 
old  subjunctives. 

Would  often  gives  the  idea  of  habitual  action,  as 

"The  squire  would  often  fall  asleep  in  his  pew." 


188  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

It  may  also  denote  a  wish.  This  is  sometimes  called 
its  optative  or  subjunctive  use,  as  "Would  to  God  I 
had  died  for  thee." 

Should  and  would  are  sometimes  merely  softened 
forms  of  shall  and  will,  as 

I  shall  like  it  if  you  will  go. 
I  should  like  it  if  you  would  go. 

"I  should  be  cautious,"  etc.,  merely  means  "It  is 
well  to  be  cautious."  "It  should  seem,"  and  "It 
would  seem"  are  both  modestly  used  in  the  sense  of  "  It 
seems."  An  interesting  distinction  in  the  use  of  should 
and  would  is  disclosed  by  a  comparison  of  the  sen- 
tences: 

If  I  should  go  there,  I  should  return  soon. 

If  you  should  go  there,  you  would  return  soon. 

If  he  should  go  there,  he  would  return  soon. 

We  see  that  in  the  principal  or  indicative  clause,  the 
auxiliaries  follow  the  law  of  the  future  tense,  while  in 
the  hypothetical  clause  should  is  used  in  all  three  per 
sons. 

The  use  of  these  words  in  questions  also  presents 
some  slightly  different  considerations  from  those  which 
apply  to  shall  and  will.  The  confusions  in  their  use 
are  greater  than  those  of  shall  and  will,  and  they  seem 
to  be  increasing,  as  apparently  antagonistic  principles 
seem  to  be  controlling  the  language  development  of 
th<-M>  idioms. 

An  attempt  to  summarize  the  principles  that  control 
the  use  of  should  and  would  may  be  made  as  f ollows : 


Shall  and  Will,   Should  and  Would         189 

When  should  and  would  are  used  as  true  past  tenses 
for  shall  and  will  (that  is,  when  they  express  either  mere 
futurity  or  a  definite  determination  in  some  past  time) 
they  follow  the  same  order  for  the  three  persons  that 
belongs  to  shall  and  will,  as 

I  feared  I  should  fall. 

I  hoped  you  would  succeed. 

I  expected  that  he  would  have  it. 

But  if  a  hypothetical  or  subjunctive  idea  is  to  be 
introduced  should  becomes  the  preferred  auxiliary,  thus 

If  I  should. 
If  you  should. 
If  he  should. 

Yet  the  principles  of  euphemism  or  of  courtesy  that 
can  modify  the  choice  of  shall  and  will  (leading  us  to 
avoid  needless  egoism  in  the  first  person  as  well  as 
needless  compulsion  in  the  second  and  third) — while 
they  affect  also  the  choice  of  should  and  would,  are  felt 
to  be  less  strenuous  in  their  application  to  these  derived 
forms.  Thus  "I  thought  I  would  fall,"  while  held  to 
be  incorrect  by  a  person  of  keen  grammatical  sense, 
carries  less  of  emphasis  on  the  unintended  idea  of  willing 
than  is  given  by  "I  will  fall."  For  this  reason  many 
persons,  in  expressing  actions  which  may  be  the  result 
of  a  degree  of  volition  (though  without  intending  to  lay 
special  emphasis  on  this  idea)  use  would  where  others 
prefer  should,  as  "I  thought  I  would  (or  should)  go  to 
Boston  before  the  end  of  the  season." 

' 


190  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Should,  in  the  sense  of  ought  is  used  for  all  three 
persons,  as 

I  know  I  should  do  it. 

I  think  you  should  do  it. 

He  should  do  it,  but  he  may  not. 

In  such  cases  the  word  is  often  emphasized. 

Although  these  principles  seem  complex,  the  num- 
ber of  cases  in  which  native-born  users  of  English  can 
go  grammatically  wrong  is  not  numerous.  Whenever  a 
sense  of  obligation  or  of  compulsion  is  to  be  made  promi- 
nent, one  naturally  uses  should,  and  if  volition  is  to  be 
emphasized,  would  is  used  intuitively. 

If  one  can  learn  to  use  "I  should,"  "we  should,"  in 
those  instances  when  it  is  not  desirable  to  lay  emphasis 
on  one's  own  volitions,  he  can  scarcely  make  a  serious 
grammatical  error.  It  is  true  that  there  remains  a 
large  area  of  cases  in  which  certain  persons  use  should 
and  others  would,  (as  in  the  second  person  of  questions, 
"  Should  you  like  to  go  ?"  "  Would  you  like  to  go  ?")  but 
the  difference  is  not  so  much  due  to  disregard  of  gram- 
matical principle  as  to  a  difference  in  people's  prefer- 
ences on  the  question  of  hiding  or  obtruding  the  slight 
element  of  volition  that  is  involved.  If  an  action  is 
voluntary  at  the  moment  the  speaker  must  be  allowed 
a  certain  degree  of  choice  in  the  matter  of  bringing 
tliis  volition  into  notice. 

So  long  as  even  the  "native  born"  are  not  entirely 
agreed  as  to  the  idiomatic  use  of  these  four  auxiliaries 
it  is  not  strange  that  for  foreign  students  of  English 
the  difficulties  go  deeper.  The  mistakes  made  by 


Shall  and    Will,    Should    and   Would        191 

foreigners  often  remind  us  of  the  merry  tale  of  the 
Frenchman  who  declared,  "I  will  drown;  nobody 
shall  help  me."  Yet  the  absurdity  lies  not  so  much 
in  the  blundering  use  of  the  English  idiom  as  in  the 
inconsistencies  of  the  language  itself  which  lead  to  this 
confusion. 

It  is  impossible  for  the  ordinary  grammar  text-book 
to  deal  with  these  four  auxiliaries  exhaustively.  One 
English  writer,  Sir  E.  W.  Head,  has  written  an  entire 
book  on  the  subject  of  "Shall  and  Will."  Yet  the  impor- 
tant points  can  easily  be  mastered  and  applied  by  one 
who  has  a  sense  of  grammatical  idiom  and  will  give 
the  matter  discriminating  attention. 

A  good  exercise  for  grammar  students  consists  in 
searching  for  these  words  in  literature  and  interpreting 
their  use  by  the  original  meaning  of  the  words  and  the 
historic  changes  in  their  application. 

A  suggestive  quotation  on  the  subject  may  be  taken 
from  the  writings  of  Richard  Grant  White,  who  says: 
"I  do  not  know  in  English  literature  another  passage 
in  which  the  distinction  between  shall  and  will,  and 
would  and  should,  is  at  once  so  elegantly,  so  variously, 
so  precisely,  and  so  compactly  illustrated  as  in  the 
following  lines  from  a  song  in  Sir  George  Etheridge's 
She  Would  if  She  Could  (1704). 

"How  long  I  shall  love  him  I  can  no  more  tell 
Than  had  I  a  fever  when  I  should  be  well. 
My  passion  shall  kill  me  before  I  will  show  it, 
And  yet  I  would  give  all  the  world  did  he  know  it. 
But  oh,  how  I  sigh,  when  I  think,  should  he  woo  me 
I  cannot  refuse  what  I  know  would  undo  me." 


XXXV111 
THE  SUBJUNCTIVE   MOOD* 

"The  subjunctive  is  not  a  simple  mood,  but  a  composite 
form,  the  wreck  of  two  moods." 

In  English  the  distinctions  between  thought  forms  and 
fact  forms  are  to  a  great  extent  levelled. — SWEET. 

Just  how  rare  this  usage  now  is  may  be  seen  from  the  fact 
that  in  ten  representative  volumes  by  recent  writers  of 
high  reputation,  containing  approximately  900,000  words, 
there  are  said  to  be  only  269  instances  of  the  subjunctive 
use  of  the  verb  be  and  only  fifteen  instances  of  the  subjunctive 
of  any  other  verb  than  be. — FROM  The  Author.  London,  1897. 

The  same  feeling  of  doubt  or  indeterminateness  that  char- 
acterizes the  subjunctive  is  often  conveyed  to  the  form  now 
assigned  to  the  indicative.  The  conditional  force  in  the 
two  differs  in  degree  rather  than  in  kind. — SOUTHWORTH. 

The  subjunctive  mood  has  so  nearly  died  out  of  every-day 
English  that  it  becomes  a  questionable  and  hazardous  pro- 
ceeding to  give  to  the  subjunctive  idea  a  distinct  meta- 
physical existence,  and  then  to  use  this  fictitious  entity  to 
conjure  with. — TOLMAN. 

If  we  lose  the  subjunctive  verb  it  will  certainly  be  a 
grievous  impoverishment  to  our  living  language,  were  it 
only  for  its  value  in  giving  variation  to  diction,  and  I  make 
bold  to  assert  that  the  writer  who  helps  to  keep  it  up  de- 
serves public  gratitude. — JOHN  EARLE. 

The  discriminating  use  of  the  subjunctive  lends  a  grace 
and  delicacy  to  the  expression  of  thought,  of  which  the  most 
finished  writers  of  to-day  gladly  avail  themselves. — SOUTH- 
WORTH. 

*AUen's  School  Grammar  (Heath  and  Co.)  gives  a 
full  treatment  of  the  uses  of  the  subjunctive  mood. 

192 


The  Subjunctive  Mood  193 

"The  poet  will  not  relinquish  the  subjunctive  mood.  He 
knows  its  value  too  well." 

It  is  not  many  years  since  text-books  in  grammar 
conjugated  the  subjunctive  mood  like  the  indicative 
with  the  conjunction  if  prefixed.  These  older  gram- 
mars also  added  a  subjunctive  form,  but  the  student 
was  left  to  infer  that  the  essence  of  the  subjunctive 
mood  lay  somehow  in  a  conjunction. 

No  text-book  or  teacher  in  good  standing  to-day 
would  endorse  this  absurdity.  In  the  treatment  of 
the  subject  at  present,  many  grammars  lay  chief  empha- 
sis upon  the  fact  that  the  subjunctive  mood  is  seldom 
heard  in  modern  English.  Both  teacher  and  text- 
book sometimes  say  virtually  to  the  young  student, 
'  The  subjunctive  mood  is  so  nearly  obsolete  that  it  is 
scarcely  worth  our  while  to  consider  it." 

Yet  the  subjunctive  were  is  still  a  required  form 
of  the  English  language.  It  is  used  to  express  a  pure 
hypothesis  that  is  known  to  be  contrary  to  facts,  as 

Would  that  he  were  here. 

If  I  were  a  Frenchman  (I  am  not)  I  might  think  differently. 

Another  subjunctive  form  that  is  less  common  than 
were,  but  is  not  going  out  of  use,  is  the  present  sub- 
junctive be  in  the  hypothesis  of  a  scientific  demon- 
stration. Our  text-books  still  say: 

"If  the  triangle  A  be  superimposed  on  the  triangle 
B,"  etc.,  and  "If  a  pendulum  be  drawn  to  one  side  it 
will  swing  to  the  other." 

The  verb  be  has  another  old  subjunctive  form,  wert 


194  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

(the  indicative  being  wast\  used  with  a  subject  of  the 
second  person  singular.  But  this,  like  its  subject  pro- 
noun, thou,  only  occurs  in  the  solemn  style  or  in  poeti- 
cal wirings. 

Other  verbs  have  a  subjunctive  form  in  the  third 
person  singular,  as,  "  If  it  rain  to-morrow,  you  cannot 
p>."  But  this  is  now  exceedingly  rare  in  spoken  Eng- 
IMi,  and  even  in  prose  writings  it  is  seldom  met  with, 
It  is  still,  however,  the  preferred  form  of  poetry. 

Although  the  subjunctive  were  (the  only  common 
subjunctive  in  spoken  English)  has  the  form  of  the 
past  tense,  it  has,  when  thus  used,  no  reference  to 
past  time. 

To  express  a  similar  hypothesis  in  relation  to  past 
time,  had  may  be  used  either  with  or  without  the  con- 
junction if,  as 


Had  the  boat  capsized,  all  would  have  been  lost. 
If  the  boat  had  capsized  all  would  have  been  lost. 


Had,  with  if,  has  sometimes  an  indicative  sense, 
however,  as 

If  he  had  already  left  the  room  that  alters  the  case.     ' 

A  subjunctive  verb  is  generally  found  in  a  subordi- 
nate clause  following  one  of  the  conjunctions,  if, 
though,  until,  lest,  or  that. 

It  may  express 

(1)  A  condition  or  hypothesis,  as 

If  thou  have  power  to  raise  him,  bring  him  hither. 

I  HENRY  IV. 


The  Subjunctive  Mood  195 

(2)  A  purpose,  as 

"Gather  up  the   fragments  thai  nothing  be  lost." 

(3)  A  tuture  contingency,  as 

"Come  down  ere  my  child  die." 
"If  I  will  that  he  tarry  till  I  come,  what  is  that  to  thee?" 

(4)  An  indirect  question,  as 

"Ye  shall  know  of  the  doctrine,  whether  it  be  of  God." 

In  some  of  these  instances  the  subjunctive  would 
now  be  replaced  by  an  indicative  or  a  potential  form. 

But  although  the  subjunctive  is  most  frequently 
found  in  subordinate  clauses,  it  is  not  confined  to  these. 
It  is  used  in  principal  clauses  to  express  a  consequence, 
of  which  the  hypothesis  may  or  may  not  be  expressed,  as 

It  were  madness  to  attempt  it. 

It  had  been  so  with  us,  had  we  been  there. 

Returning  were  as  tedious  as  go  o'er. — MACBETH. 

Modern  English  generally  uses  would  instead  of 
these  subjunctives  of  consequence. 

But  the  most  frequent  use  of  the  subjunctive  in 
principal  clauses,  occurs  in  a  class  of  sentences  that 
have  a  general  exclamatory  character,  and  are  used 
with  either  an  imperative  or  an  optative  force,  as 

Heaven  forgive  him! 

Thy  kingdom  come. 

Strike  we  a  blow  for  freedom! 

Come  one,  come  all. 


196  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Sit  we  down,  and  hear  Bernardo  speak  of  this. 
Be  it  resolved: 

Sentences  of  this  class  which  express  a  wish,  have 
sometimes  been  classed  together  as  an  optative  mood. 
Modern  English  generally  uses  may  or  let  for  sentences 
of  this  kind,  as  "Let  us  strike  a  blow  for  freedom!" 
Other  grammarians  would  class  these  sentences  with 
the  imperatives,  yet  the  true  imperative  is  usually  con- 
sidered as  belonging  only  to  the  second  person.  It 
seems  reasonable  to  group  together  all  the  peculiar 
thought  forms  of  the  verb  (as  distinguished  from  the 
indicative  or  fact  forms),  and  there  seems  to  be  no  serious 
objection  to  making  the  term,  subjunctive  mood,  cover 
these  optative  and  exclamatory  phrases  also. 

The  tendency  of  modern  English  is  against  the  sub- 
junctive in  many  cases  where  the  bias  of  the  older 
English  was  in  favor  of  its  use.  Both  the  indicative 
and  the  potential  forms  have  been  extended  in  appli- 
cation as  the  subjunctive  has  dropped  out  of  use. 

Modern  English  uses  the  indicative  in  most  cases 
where  the  hypothetical  or  doubtful  character  of  the 
statement  is  not  clearly  and  emphatically  marked.  In 
the  expression  of  future  uncertainties,  there  are  still 
cases  where  either  the  indicative  or  subjunctive  may 
be  considered  legitimate,  yet  in  which  the  potential 
(or  conditional)  auxiliary  should  is  to  be  preferred  to 
either.  Thus, "  If  he  go  "  is  correct  in  poetry,  and  "  If  he 
goes"  is  the  common  spoken  form;  but  "  If  he  should 
go"  (since  it  expresses  moredoubtthan  "If  he  goes"), 
is  the  best  substitute  for  the  older  subjunctive  mood 


The  Subjunctive  Mood  197 

The  reasons  for  the  rarity  of  the  subjunctive  in  mod- 
ern English  are  chiefly  two : 

(1)  A   growing   carelessness   in   discriminating   be- 
tween thought-form  and  fact-form,  which  has  led  to 
the  actual    loss   (in    some  cases)  of  the  subjunctive 
forms  themselves. 

(2)  The  large  development  of  the  auxiliary  forma- 
tions.    These  being  more  specific  than  the  subjunctive 
have  in  large  measure  taken  its  place. 

But  although  the  subjunctive  is  rare  in  modern 
English,  the  student  should  remember  that  the  occa- 
sional and  peculiar  forms  of  language  still  in  good  use, 
are  those  which  it  is  most  needful  to  study.  So  long 
as  Shakespeare  and  the  King  James's  version  of  the 
Bible  retain  their  present  value,  it  is  going  to  be  need- 
ful for  the  grammar  student  to  understand  the  sub- 
junctive mood. 

Nor  is  its  modern  literary  use  unimportant.  There 
is  many  a  line  in  modern  poetry  and  hymn  literature 
that  would  become  prosaic  if  the  mode  of  the  verb 
were  changed  to  the  indicative. 

As  examples  of  this  literary  use  we  may  quote : 

Then  Heaven  tries  the  earth  if  itjje  in  tune. — LOWELL. 

To  fight  were  deadly  peril. — SCOTT. 

For  if  the  flour  be  fresh  and  sound, 

And  if  the  bread  be  light  and  sweet, 

Who  careth  in  what  mill  'twas  ground? — LONGFELLOW. 

If  happiness  have  not  her  seat 

And  center  in  the  breast 
We  may  be  wise,  or  rich,  or  great 

But  never  can  be  blest. — BURNS. 


198  Gram  mar  and  Its  Reasons 

As  we  look  back  into  the  earlier  English  literature 
we  find  more  abundant  examples,  not  only  in  poetry 
but  in  prose  as  well.  The  student  of  grammar  should 
explore  the  fields  of  literature  for  illustrations  of  the 
subjunctive  mood.  He  will  find  instances,  however, 
which  were  properly  considered  as  subjunctives  by 
the  older  grammarians,  but  which  it  is  hardly  worth 
while  to  class  with  these  at  present.  The  forms  of 
the  indicative  and  the  subjunctive  in  some  tenses,  werfc 
never  distinct.  In  advanced  classes  it  may  be  worm 
while  to  try  to  distinguish  the  subjunctive  from  the 
indicative  by  historical  and  logical  tests,  even  when  the 
forms  are  identical.  But  for  the  ordinary  purposes  of 
elementary  grammar  it  is  enough  for  the  student  to 
recognize  the  peculiar  subjunctive  forms  in  the  Englisri 
which  he  studies  and  uses,  and  to  see  the  principles 
which  have  led  to  this  use. 

The  intelligent  use  of  the  subjunctive  is  one  of  the 
niceties  of  expression,  even  in  modern  speech  and 
writing.  It  often  gives  a  slightly  different  meaning 
to  a  phrase.  A  striking  example  is  shown  in  the  lan- 
guage of  formal  acts  and  resolves,  as 

"Resolved,  That  the  Superintendent  be,  and  is  hereby 
instructed  to  do"  so  and  so. 

The  teacher  of  grammar  should  recognize  the  loss 
«.f  subjunctive  forms  in  modern  English.  But  he 
should  not  forget  that  it  is  possible,  by  unduly  empha- 
sizing the  fact,  to  hasten  its  departure,  causing  real 
impoverishment  of  the  language. 


XXXIX 
PARTICIPLES 

Buehler  treats  infinitives  and  participles  as  separate 
parts  of  speech.  Will  this  prove  to  be  an  application  of 
the  maxim  "Divide  and  conquer"? — TOLMAN. 

The  participle  is  the  most  delicate  part  of  speech  in  the 
language,  and  as  such  is  the  one  most  frequently  abused  or 
maltreated. — ARLO  BATES. 

Pronouns  and  participles  —  both  elusive,  and  both  re- 
quiring most  careful  supervision  to  prevent  their  establish- 
ing with  other  parts  of  speech  relations  which  cannot  for  a 
moment  be  allowed  without  scandal. — ARLO  BATES. 

In  verb  phrases  compounded  with  have,  the  participial 
form  has  lost  its  proper  force  and  cannot  always  be  ex- 
plained grammatically.  In  all  other  verb  phrases  the  par- 
ticiple has  its  proper  adjective  force. — HARPER  AND  BURGESS. 

The  participles  are  words  which  are  derived  from 
verbs  and  may  take  the  limitations  of  the  verb,  yet 
which  have  the  nature  and  use  of  adjectives. 

Neither  the  participle  nor  the  infinitive  is  usually 
considered  a  distinct  part  of  speech,  yet  the  place 
to  teach  the  definitions  of  these  is  in  connection  with 
the  parts  of  speech.  Until  these  are  both  known 
the  phrase  forms  of  the  verb  cannot  be  understood, 
and  it  is  impossible  to  name  the  parts  of  speech  in 
miscellaneous  sentences. 

There  are  two  simple  or  primary  participles  and 
several  phrase  forms.  The  first  primary  participle 

199 


Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

<  nds  In  ing,  and  belongs  to  all  verbs  except  a  few  of  the 
auxiliaries.  Its  adjective  character  even  when  used  in 
verb  phrases,  as  "  He  is  running,"  is  plainly  seen.  It 
is  usually  called  the  present  participle,  though  as  its 
time  signification  is  only  relative  and  depends  on  the 
vrrb  with  which  it  is  connected,  some  grammarians 
prefer  to  call  it  the  imperfect  or  simply  the  active 
participle.  This  verbal  form  in  ing  has  also  an  infini- 
tive use.  (See  Chapter  40.) 

There  is  another  primary  participle  that  is  variously 
known  as  the  past,  the  perfect,  or  the  passive  participle. 
Its  use  and  meaning  vary  greatly.  It  is  one  of  the  prin- 
cipal parts  of  the  verb,  and  enters  into  a  larger  number 
of  verb  phrases  than  any  other  verbal  form,  being  used 
in  making  the  perfect  tenses  of  the  active  voice  and  all 
the  tenses  of  the  passive  voice. 

The  true  participial  character  of  the  past  participle 
does  not  always  seem  evident.  Been,  the  most  com- 
mon of  all  the  past  participles  is  never  used  adjectively. 
The  same  is  true  of  the  past  participles  of  most  of  the 
other  neuter  or  intransitive  verbs. 

In  active  verb  phrases  where  past  participles  occur, 
such  as, 

I  have  lived  here  many  years. 
I  have  written  a  letter. 

the  past  participles  have  a  certain  remote  or  historic 
adjective  relation  which  may  be  dimly  recognized, 
but  the  meaning  is  so  blended  that  the  verb  phrase  is 
usually  thought  of  as  inseparable.  If  we  compare 


Participles  201 

I  have  written  a  letter, 
with 

I  have  a  letter  written, 

we  see  that  in  the  latter  sentence  have  is  no  longer  an 
auxiliary,  but  has  reverted  to  its  original  use  as  a  prin- 
cipal verb,  and  written  though  used  adjectively  has 
gained  a  passive  meaning,  like  that  of  the  participle  in 
a  passive  verb  phrase,  such  as  "The  letter  is  written." 

In  a  similar  way,  the  participle  of  any  transitive  verb 
may  be  used  adjectively  outside  of  a  verb  phrase.  But 
in  this  connection  it  is  in  no  sense  past.  It  has  ac- 
quired a  passive  meaning  and  is  usually  called  the 
passive  participle,  as,  "  The  house  seen  in  the  distance, 
looks  small." 

A  few  past  participles  of  intransitive  verbs  have 
acquired  an  adjective  use  in  somewhat  of  a  passive 
sense,  as  "a  grown  man,"  "The  risen  sun,"  "A  gone 
goose." 

The-past-participle  of  an  intransitive  verb  is  some- 
times used  as  a  predicate  adjective  after  the  verb  be, 
producing  a  phrase  that  resembles  the  passive  voice, 
though  without  the  true  passive  signification,  as, 
"Babylon  is  fallen."  The  phrase  thus  formed  is  also 
related  in  meaning  to  the  perfect  tense  of  the  active 
voice.  Thus  "I  am  arrived"  and  "I  have  arrived" 
are  nearly  equivalent  in  meaning.  The  former  is  the 
more  logical  form  of  expression,  however.  It  was 
the  usual  form  in  old  English  for  intransitive  verbs,  and 
is  still  the  common  idiom  of  German,  though  in  modern 


202  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

English  it  has  mostly  been  discarded  in  favor  of  the 
phrase  with  have. 

The  past  participle  has  more  irregularities  of  spell- 
ing than  any  other  verbal  form.  When  a  strong  verb 
loses  its  ancient  inflections,  or  acquires  those  of  the 
weak  conjugation,  the  older  participial  word  is  often 
retained  for  adjective  uses,  while  the  new  or  weaker 
form  is  used  in  true  participial  relations.  Thus, 
sJiaven,  molten,  and  sunken  are  now  adjective  forms, 
while  shaved,  melted  and  sunk  are  the  forms  generally 
used  in  participial  relations.  By  some  grammarians 
the  past  participle  is  called  the  perfect  participle, 
though  this  name  is  usually  reserved  for  one  of  the 
phrase  forms. 

In  addition  to  the  two  primary  participles  there  are 
four  participial  phrase  forms. 

A  complete  view  of  the  participles  of  the  verb  may 
be  given  as  follows : 

Seeing,  present  active  participle;  seen,  past  or  passive 
participle. 

Phrases. 

Having  seen — perfect  active. 
Having  been  seeing— perfect  active  progressive. 
Being  seen — passive  imperfect. 
Having  been  seen — passive  perfect. 


XL 

INFINITIVES 

The  true,  or  simple,  infinitive  is  the  name  of  the  verb,  as 
go,  while  to  go  is  a  phrase  or  constructive  form.  I  know  of 
no  error  in  English  Grammar  so  fruitful  of  confusion  to  the 
student  of  English  Grammar  as  the  false  idea  that  to  go  is 
the  true  (or  only)  English  infinitive.  In  French  and  German, 
oiler  or  gehen  usually  means  go,  while  to  go  is  a  aller  or 
%u  gehcn. — JOYNES. 

The  practice  of  joining  to  the  simple  infinitive  the  preposi- 
tion to  was  itself  a  corruption  originally.  In  our  early 
speech  to  belonged  strictly  to  the  gerund,  or,  as  it  is  some- 
times called,  the  dative  case  of  the  infinitive.  Prefixed  to 
the  gerund  it  meant  something.  But  with  the  simple 
infinitive  it  merely  precedes;  it  does  not  govern.  It  is  so 
valueless  in  itself  that  when  it  is  omitted,  as  it  regularly  is 
after  certain  verbs,  its  absence  is  not  even  felt. — LOUNSBURY. 

The  infinitive  is  perhaps  the  most  difficult  subject  in 
English  grammar  on  account  of  the  great  variety  of  its 
uses. — HARPER  AND  BURGESS. 

It  is  long  since  up-to-date  teachers  or  text-books 
have  called  the  infinitive  a  mood  of  the  verb.  Its  entire 
lack  of  assertive  power  precludes  such  an  interpretation. 
Grammarians  struggled  long  with  this  form,  and  by 
common  consent  infinitives  and  participles  are  usually 
classed  together  as  verbals,  although  in  their  logical 
relations  they  are  nouns  and  adjectives  rather  than  true 

verbs. 

203 


204?  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

The  infinitive  is  an  abstract  noun.  The  chief  or 
root  infinitive  of  a  verb  names  the  idea  which  the  verb 
stands  for,  and  thus  becomes  the  name  of  the  verb 
itself. 

The  infinitive  originally  had  no  to,  and  is  occasion- 
ally still  so  used,  as, 

"Better  dwell  in  the  midst  of  alarms 
Than  reign  in  this  horrible  place." 

But  the  modern  infinitive  is  usually  accompanied  by 
to,  which  was  originally  a  preposition,  but  is  now 
thought  of  almost  as  a  part  of  the  infinitive  itself  and 
has  sometimes  unfortunately  been  called  its  sign. 
When  an  infinitive  becomes  a  part  of  a  verb  phrase  to 
is  not  used,  as  in  "may  go,"  "can  do,"  etc. 

The  infinitive  originally  had  different  cases.  It  was 
often  used  in  the  dative  though  sometimes  in  the  ac- 
cusative, or  in  the  old  case  called  in  some  languages  the 
locative.  The  infinitive  of  purpose  was  a  dative  in- 
finitive and  corresponded  in  meaning  to  the  dative 
supine  in  um,  as,  "A  sower  went  out  to  sow  his  seed." 
Such  phrases  as,  "rooms  to  rent,"  "apples  to  sell," 
also  represent  the  usage  of  the  old  dative  infinitive. 

It  was  this  infinitive  of  purpose  only  that  in  old 
English  had  to.  Later, in  the  seventeenth  century,  u  hen 
the  sense  of  to  was  weakened,  for  sometimes  prec<  cled 
this  infinitive  form,  as,  "What  went  ye  out  for  to  see?" 

The  usual  infinitive  termination  was  an,  as  drinc  /in, 
to  drink.  In  the  twelfth  and  following  centuries,  an 
became  en  and  finally  e  and  the  e  itself  became  a  silen 


Infinitives  205 

letter.  As  the  terminations  of  the  infinitive  fell  away 
the  to  of  the  infinitive  of  purpose  extended  itself  to 
the  other  forms. 

Yet  some  verbs  were  so  constantly  followed  by  an 
infinitive  that  the  preposition  to  was  not  introduced. 
To  this  class  belong  the  potential  auxiliaries,  and  a  few 
other  verbs,  such  as  bid,  dare,  need,  let,  make,  and  a 
few  others.  In  many  of  the  phrases  thus  formed  the 
infinitives  seem  to  have  lost  their  original  independence, 
and  the  phrase  is  usually  treated  as  inseparable.  Yet 
the  student  of  English  should  be  able  to  recognize  in 
each  phrase  the  original  character  of  each  component 
word. 

There  are  also  various  idiomatic  or  abbreviated 
expressions  in  which  to  is  not  used,  as. 

Please  go. 

You  had  better  go  and  see. 

What,  be  gone  all  day? 

Why  not  tell  me? 

He  cannot  choose  but  know. 

A  colloquial  idiom  that  has  come  into  use  during  the 
last  century  is  the  use  of  to  in  place  of  the  entire 
infinitive,  as, 

"I  should  like  to." 

The  little  beggars  are  doing  just  what  I  don't  want  them 
to. — STEVENSON. 

An  adverb  is  sometimes  placed  between  to  and  the 
infinitive,  though  this  practice  was  objected  to  by  the 
older  grammarians.  (See  Chapter  57.) 


206  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Besides  the  ordinary  simple  infinitive  with  to,  there 
is  also  a  participial  infinitive.  It  has  the  form  of  the 
active  participle,  but  the  use  of  a  noun,  and  can  take 
the  limitations  of  the  verb  from  which  it  was  derived 
as,  "There  is  a  pleasure  in  seeing  plants  grow."  It 
resembles  the  Latin  gerund,  and  is  sometimes  called 
by  that  name  in  English.  (See  Chapter  41.) 

In  addition  to  these  two  simple  infinitive  forms, 
there  are  several  infinitive  phrases. 

Ah1  the  infinitives  of  the  verb  give  may  be  shown 
as  follows: 

Give,  or  to  give,  root  infinitive;  giving,  participial  infinitive. 

PHRASE  FORMS. 

To  be  giving — active  progressive. 

To  |$ve  given — active  perfect. 

To  have  been  giving — active,  perfect  progressive 

To  be  given — passive. 

To"T!Fave  been  given — passive,  perfect. 

In  its  primary  use  the  infinitive  is  a  noun  in  either 
the  nominative  or  the  objective  relation,  as, 

To  do  so  is  to  be  a  coward. 
I  want  to  try  it. 

But  the  infinitive  (as  well  as  other  substantive  words) 
has  certain  uses  that  shade  off  into  adjective  or  ad- 
verbial constructions,  as  "a  house  to  let,"  "good  to 
eat,"  "wonderful  to  tell."  It  is  not  always  easy  to  in- 
terpret an  infinitive  in  its  relationships.  In  an  adjective 
relation  an  infinitive  may  limit  a  noun  directly  as, 
A  rule  to  go  by; 

Or  as  an  apposjtjve,  as, 

A  desire  to  be  loved. 


Infinitives  207 

It  may  also  be  the  attribute  of  a  sentence,  as, 
He  is  to  die  at  sunrise. 

Or  an  objective  predicate,  as, 

I  declare  this  to  be  true. 
I  wanted  him  to  go  at  once. 

In  an  adverbial  relation,  it  may  limit  an  adjective,  as, 
Glad  to  see  you.    Eager  to  go. 

Or  an  adverb,  as, 

Not  strong  enough  to  lift  it. 

The  infinitive  of  purpose  is  an  adverbial  infinitive,  as, 
He  went  to  find  it. 

In  a  similar  way  the  infinitive  may  express  a  result 
adverbially,  as, 

It  fell  so  as  to  obstruct  the  view. 

Some  knowledge  of  historical  and  comparative 
grammar  will  help  a  teacher  to  understand  and 
interpret  the  infinitive  in  its  various  uses. 


XLI 
VERBAL  FORMS  IN  ING. 

The  grammarian  in  some  unexplained  way  became  greatly 
afraid  of  the  word  "gerund,"  and  huddled  that  form  of  the 
verb  in  with  participles,  or  with  nouns,  by  extending  too 
widely  the  use  of  the  phrase  "verbal  noun."  In  the  best 
of  recent  grammars  this  error  has  been  righted  and  the  gerund 
is  given  its  proper  recognition.  The  matter  is  complicated 
by  the  fact  that  the  ending  ing  belongs  also  to  nouns  pure 
and  simple. — ARLO  BATES. 

The  gerund  is  Janus-faced;  a  noun  on  one  side  and  a  verb 
on  the  other. — RAMSEY. 

"The  gerund  gives  the  idea  of  processes  going  vitally 
forward  with  vivid  force." 

Modern  English  forms  in  ing  represent  different  orig- 
inal forms  which  in  old  English  had  different  end- 
ings. 

The  participle  in  old  English  ended  in  ende,  or  ande, 
which  later  became  inde  or  ynde  and  finally  yng  or  ing. 
The  abstract  or  verbal  noun  originally  ended  in  inig 
and  this  was  afterwards  also  written  yng  or  ing.  The 
two  verbal  forms  thus  became  blended  and  were  finally 
thought  of  as  one. 

The  true  infinitive  of  the  verb  is  also  closely  related 
to  th<»  abstract  noun.  Thus,  "Seeing  is  believing"  and 

T"  pee  ix  to  l><>lieve"  are  nearly  alike  in  meaning. 
Modern  En^li>h  uses  a  verbal  in  ing  in  many  cases 

208 


Verbal  Forms  in  "ing"  209 

where  in  older  English  the  infinitive  in  an  or  en  would 
have  been  used. 

Partly  on  account  of  these  different  origins  the  verbal 
form  in  ing  has  many  uses  in  English,  as  follows: 

She  was  singing — a  participle  used  in  making  a  verb 
phrase. 

The  bird  singing  on  the  tree  is  a  thrush — a  participle 
having  verbal  limitations,  but  an  appositive  adjective  re- 
lation. 

The  singing  bird  sits  on  the  tree — pure  adjective. 

Singing  is  a  good  exercise — abstract  or  verbal  noun. 

She  amused  us  by  her  singing  of  that  song — also  an  ab- 
stract or  verbal  noun,  limited  like  a  noun. 

She  pleased  us  by  singing  the  song  so  well — verbal  noun 
with  verbal  modifiers  (called  participial  infinitive  and  also 
sometimes  called  gerund.)* 

Some  modern  grammarians  have  revived  the  old  term 
gerund  for  these  verbals  that  show  combined  character 
and  uses.  The  term  is  somewhat  loosely  applied,  but 
is  usually  confined  to  verbals  that  are  participial  in 

*It  seems  desirable  in  English  grammar  to  distinguish 
by  some  explicit  term  those  verbals  which  retain  much  of 
their  original  verbal  character  from  those  that  are  exclusively 
nouns  in  their  sentence  construction.  The  term  gerund, 
which  is  used  in  Latin  grammar  to  refer  to  a  verbal  noun 
governing  cases,  and  which  has  been  adopted  by  some 
recent  writers  on  English,  is  therefore  used  in  this  chapter 
with  this  signification.  But  the  use  of  this  word  in  English 
grammar  is  not  without  some  elements  of  confusion.  Louns- 
bury  and  other  writers  on  grammar  speak  of  the  old  dative 
infinitive  as  the  gerundial  use  of  the  infinitive,  and  Bain  and 
other  grammarians  apply  the  term  gerund  to  the  modern 
infinitive  of  purpose,  as,  "I  come  to  write  a  letter."  It 
would  seem  to  be  needful  at  present  in  using  the  term  ge- 
rund in  English  grammar,  that  one  should  first  clearly 
define  his  own  application  of  it. 


210  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

form  and  substantive  in  use  and  that  at  the  same  time 
have  verbal  modifiers  (usually  a  direct  object).  In- 
transitive participial  nouns,  however,  are  also  called 
gerunds  by  these  writers  when  the  verbal  limitation 
is  made  prominent,  as  "His  walking  to  the  village 
was  needless." 

When  a  verbal  in  ing  is  preceded  by  the  and  followed 
by  of  it  is  a  pure  verbal  noun.  Verbal  nouns  in  ing 
may  be  pluralized,  but  cannot  at  the  same  time  take 
objects  or  other  verbal  limitations,  as,  "  The  windings 
of  the  river."  "Paul's  teachings." 

A  pure  noun  in  ing  names  the  act  or  state,  but  the 
gerund  generally  shows  explicitly  that  the  act  is  going 
forward,  as,  "The  putting  it  into  place  again  was  no 
easy  task." 

The  noun  character  of  the  gerund  is  frequently  em- 
phasized by  its  having  (in  addition  to  the  verbal  modi- 
fiers) a  preceding  adjective  modifier,  as  the  or  a  pos- 
sessive case;  as, 

My  leaving  Guido  were  a  kind  of  death. — BROWNING. 

The  gerundive  use  is  not  confined  to  the  simple 
verbals  in  ing  but  is  shared  by  participial  phrase  forms 
also,  as, 

They  heard  of  his  having  written  the  letter. 
I  distinctly  remember  having  seen  him. 

There  is  a  still  older  English  construction  containing  a 
verbal  in  ing  after  a  noun  or  pronoun,  but  having  the 
adjective  rather  than  the  noun  use,  as, 

What's  the  use  of  me  reciting  that  chapter? 
Ye  seek  a  proof  of  Christ  speaking  in  us. — BIBLE, 


Verbal  Forms  in  "ing"  211 

This  is  occasionally  met  with  in  modern  literature,  as, 

Would  you  mind  me  asking  you  a  few  questions? — 
STEVENSON. 

The  construction  is  not  uncommon  when  it  is  a  noun 
phrase  that  is  limited  by  the  participle,  as, 

Who  ever  heard  of  an  army  superior  in  numbers  retreat- 
ing without  a  blow? 

But  when  a  pronoun  is  used  the  modern  gerundive 
form  is  generally  preferred,  as, 

I  never  thought  of  his  doing  it — (not,  him  doing  it.) 

The  thought  in  the  two  cases  differs  slightly,  however. 

In  " Think  of  me  doing  it"  the  thought  is  of  me. 

In  "Think  of  my  doing  it"  the  thought  is  of  the 
doing. 

The  verbals  in  ing  in  their  participial  use  sometimes 
take  a  passive  meaning,  as, 

The  tea  is  making. 
One  thing  is  wanting. 
So  much  is  owing. 
The  house  is  building. 

In  the  older  English  this  was  usually  preceded  by 
the  prepositional  prefix  a,  as,  "  The  house  is  a-building." 

This  prefix  is  sometimes  used  also  for  an  intransitive 
form  where  the  meaning  is  not  passive,  as, 

Old  Time  is  still  a-flying. — HERRICK. 

We  see  then  that  the  verbals  in  ing  have  a  mixed  char- 
acter among  the  parts  of  speech.  Sometimes  the  ad- 


212  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

jective  character  is  prominent,  sometimes  the  noun 
character.  And  in  each  of  these  relations  the  verbal 
character  may  be  very  obscure  (or  almost  wholly  lack- 
inur)  or  it  may  be  made  prominent  by  the  presence  of 
a  clinvt  object  and  other  verbal  modifiers. 

Modern  writers  on  grammar  have  shown  much  in- 
terest in  tin*  history  and  the  uses  of  these  complex  par- 
ticipial forms  in  ing. 


XLII 

ADVERBS 

Words  of  more  or  less  obscure  descent,  belonging  to  no 
one  of  the  regularly  defined  classes  of  nouns  or  verbs,  sub- 
ject to  no  laws  or  rules,  and  yet  not  only  incorporated  into 
the  idiom  but  always  of  undeniable  importance, — this  ex- 
ceptional and  generally  ill-treated  class  of  words  we  call 
after  the  fashion  of  ancient  grammarians,  adverbs.  The 
old  Latin  writers,  whenever  a  word  was  found  to  be  estab- 
lished in  use  which  differed  from  its  ordinary  manner  of 
signifying,  thrust  it  aside  into  the  class  of  adverbs. — M. 
SCHELE  DE  VERB. 

The  common  sink  and  repository  of  all  heterogeneous  and 
unknown  corruptions. — HORNE  TOOKE. 

When  a  man  says  "I  didn't  never  say  nothing  to  nobody," 
this  is  a  sound  Old  English  idiom,  traces  of  which  are  found 
after  1600. — KINGTON  OLIPHANT. 

"Adverbs  shade  off  into  prepositions  and  conjunctions, 
and  the  same  word  is  often  used  as  two  of  these  parts  of 
speech  or  even  as  all  the  three." 

"No  other  interchange  of  classification  is  more  frequent 
than  that  of  adverb  and  preposition,  and  vice  versa,  and  in 
these  cases  at  least  the  change  is  generally  due  to  ellipsis." 

Judging  from  the  names  of  the  two  parts  of  speech 
one  might  suppose  that  the  adverb  was  strictly  a  verb 
modifier  and  that  the  adjective  had  a  general  limiting 
power  for  other  parts  of  speech.  But  on  the  contrary 
it  is  the  adjective  which  is  confined  to  the  one  relation 

213 


214  immar  and  Its  Reason* 

of  noun  modifier,  while  all  other  limiting  words  are 
indiscriminately  classed  together  as  adverbs. 

Many  of  the  adverbs  were  originally  of  some  oilier 
part  of  speech;  some  are  abbreviations  or  corrupt  forms 
of  other  words.  Many  of  the  prepositions  have  also 
an  adverbial  use.  The  one  essential  characteristic  of 
an  adverb  is  that  it  is  a  limiting  or  subordinate  word 
that  is  joined  to  some  other  part  of  speech  than  a 
noun. 

An  adverb  may  limit  a  verb,  an  adjective  or  another 
adverb.  Occasionally  also  it  limits  a  preposition  or  a 
connective.  It  frequently  gives  intensifying  or  diminish- 
ing force  to  an  entire  statement,  as,  "Truly  God  is 
good."  In  such  cases  it  is  called  a  modal  adverb. 
Even  the  independent  words  of  negation  or  affirmation, 
yes  and  no,  are  sometimes  loosely  classed  with  the 
modal  adverbs.  They  are  equivalent  to  abridged  sen- 
tences, however,  and  are  sometimes  classed  with  the 
interjections. 

Adverbs  are  loosely  subdivided  according  to  meaning, 
into  those  denoting  place,  time,  cause,  manner,  quantity, 
etc.  In  reference  to  grammatical  use  we  speak  of  con- 
junctive, relative  and  interrogative  as  well  as  modal 
adverbs. 

Many  adverbs  are  used  in  pairs  with  correlative  sig- 
nification, as,  to  and  fro,  now  and  then,  here  and  there, 
hither  and  thither,  up  and  down,  right  and  left.  An 
adverb  is  often  repeated  with  correlative  force,  as, 
partly,  partly;  now,  now.  English  is  also  rich  in 
adverbial  phrases,  idiomatic  and  sometimes  hard  to 


Adverbs  215 

explain,  as  "at  once,"  "at  all,"  "in  vain,"  "of  old," 
"one  by  one." 

The  line  of  division  between  adjective  and  adverb 
is  not  very  clearly  marked.  The  same  word  often 
allows  the  two  uses.  Some  adverbs,  like  adjectives, 
admit  of  comparison,  and  the  degrees  of  comparison 
are  formed  in  the  same  way  as  for  adjectives. 

Many  of  our  Anglo-Saxon  adjectives  of  one  syllable 
had  originally  an  adverbial  form  ending  in  e.  Thus 
Chaucer  uses  the  word  h  o  t  e  as  the  adverbial  form  of 
the  adjective  hot.  This  final  e  shared  the  fate  of  many 
other  final  e's  and  was  gradually  dropped.  With  the 
dropping  of  the  termination  such  adverbs  became 
identical  in  form  with  the  adjectives. 

An  ly  added  to  an  adjective  is  a  modern  adverbial 
termination.  Adverbs  thus  formed  are  not  used  ad- 
jectively;  though  the  corresponding  adjective  form  is 
frequently  used  in  an  adverbial  relation,  especially 
by  the  poets,  who  find  the  adjective  more  poetic  than 
the  strictly  adverbial  form.  This  usage  is  not  an  in- 
novation but  has  its  root  in  the  older  English.  Such 
colloquial  expressions  as  "Walk  slow"  are  common 
among  people  who  are  not  "bookish,"  even  when  the 
adverb  in  ly  is  the  modern  literary  form. 

One  of  the  time-honored  battlegrounds  of  grammarians 
is  the  question  whether  certain  predicate  terms  are  modi- 
fiers of  the  subject  or  the  verb.  In  most  of  these  cases 
the  real  truth  is  that  both  noun  and  verb  are  in  a  de- 
gree modified.  In  "  He  walks  erect,"  the  predicate  term 
has  both  an  adjective  and  an  adverbial  relationship. 


216  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

It  is  a  peculiarity  of  the  English  idiom  that  the  use 
of  not  in  a  sentence  requires  the  auxiliary  do,  as  "  He 
does  not  like  it."  The  poetic  form  allows  the  not  with 
the  common  verb  form,  but  the  not  is  placed  after  the 
verb,  and  usually  at  the  end  of  the  sentence,  as,  "She 
likes  me  not."  There  are  exceptions  in  literature, 
however,  to  this  position  of  the  not,  as, 

She  not  denies  it. — SHAKSPEARB. 

If  the  adverb  not  be  placed  in  a  sentence  containing 
another  negative  it  neutralizes  it,  as, 

He  does  not  work  for  nothing. 

Formerly  two  negatives  were  used  to  make  a  stronger 
negative  but  this  was  given  up  under  the  influence  of 
Latin,  in  which  two  negatives  make  an  affirmative. 

In  old  English  nay  was  used  to  answer  a  question 
affirmative  in  its  form,  and  no  a  negative  one,  as, 

,  Is  he  going?    Nay. 

Is  not  he  going?    No. 

But  this  distinction  fell  away,  and  yea  and  nay  are 
now  used  in  poetic  style  only. 

In  a  bright  paragraph  in  a  literary  journal  a  modern 
writer  discusses  "nervous  adverbs,"  that  is  those  that 
are  "nervous"  either  in  position  or  in  literary  form. 
As  illustrations  of  the  two  cases  he  quotes,  "Few 
people  learn  anything  that  is  worth  learning,  easily," 
and  also  the  little  girl  who  "liked  eggs  boiled  softly." 

Only  and  certain  of  the  modal  adverbs  show  an 
especial  tendency  to  lose  their  right  position  in  the 


Adverbs  217 

sentence.  The  usual  place  for  only  is  immediately 
before  the  word  which  it  modifies.  Yet  there  are  in- 
stances in  which  other  considerations  may  alter  this 
position.  In  the  poem  "Identity"  no  less  careful  a 
writer  than  Thomas  Bailey  Aldrich  has  included  the 
line, "  I  only  died  last  night. "  To  have  placed  only  after 
died  would  of  course  have  spoiled  the  meter;  but  it 
would  be  interesting  to  know  just  how  long  Mr.  Aldrich 
struggled  with  that  line  before  deciding  to  let  it  go  in 
this  shape. 

The  propriety  of  placing  an  adverb  between  an 
infinitive  and  its  sign  has  of  ten  been  questioned,  but  the 
practice  seems  to  be  increasing.  (See  Chapter  57, 
on  "The  Split  Infinitive.") 

Some  critics  have  also  objected  to  the  placing  of  an 
adverb  between  the  parts  of  a  compound  tense,  prefer- 
ring "probably  will  go,  ""has  searched  carefully,"  etc., 
to  "will  probably  go"  and  "has  carefully  searched." 
It  is  frequently  better  that  the  adverb  should  precede  or 
follow  the  entire  phrase,  but  there  are  many  instances 
in  which  the  middle  of  the  verb  phrase  seems  to  be  the 
required  place  for  the  adverb. 

It  is  a  good  principle  in  writing  that  adverbs  should 
be  somewhat  sparingly  used.  This  is  especially  true 
of  the  intensive  adverbs.  The  effect  of  very  is  quite  as 
often  weakening,  as  strengthening,  to  the  force  of  a 
sentence.  Vastly  seems  to  have  been  abused  in  the 
eighteenth  century  somewhat  as  awfully  was  dur- 
ing the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth. 

Yet  a  writer's  skill  is  sometimes  emphatically  shown 


218  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

in  the  choice  of  an  unusual  and  appropriate  adverb. 
Thus  Dickens  speaks  of  two  men  at  a  funeral  "who 
spoke  as  if  they  themselves  were  notoriously  immortal." 
The  adverb  may  indeed  be  the  most  decorative  and 
distinguishing  of  words.  Ruskin  somewhere  tells  us 
of  the  humility  of  great  men  who  are  nevertheless, 
"endlessly,  foolishly,  incredibly,  merciful." 

Sir  Arthur  Helps  in  describing  a  weighty  sentence 
says  that  it  should  be  so  constructed  that  no  other 
writer  will  ever  be  able  to  "  say  the  like  thing  so  choicely, 
tersely,  meUifliiously,  and  completely"  Such  an  occa- 
sional prodigality  of  adverbs  may  give  a  fine  touch  to  a 
piece  of  writing.  Yet  it  is  only  the  master's  hand  that 
should  venture  to  lay  them  on  so  thick. 


XLIH 
PREPOSITIONS 

The  grammatical  function  of  a  preposition  is  to  make  the 
noun-word  it  governs  into  an  adjunct-word. — SWEET. 

Some  grammarians  have  given  lists  of  adverbs,  preposi- 
tions, and  conjunctions,  for  what  reason  I  know  not,  seeing 
that  they  have  not  attempted  to  give  lists  of  the  words  of 
other  parts  of  speech. — COBBETT.  (1818.) 

The  small  parts  of  speech  are  so  fine  as  constantly  to  elude 
the  critical  attention  of  the  writer,  but  so  important  as 
constantly  to  determine  the  critical  effect  of  the  sentence 
as  a  whole. — ARLO  BATES. 

"I  was  made  a  victim  in  a  court  of  law  of  two  preposi- 
tions and  a  conjunction.  Of,  concerning,  and  that  were  the 
abject  instruments  of  my  cruel  extinction." 

In  the  sentence  "This  is  a  good  country  to  be  born  in,  to 
live  for,  to  die  for,"  the  position  of  the  preposition  is  the 
most  genuine  English. — JOYNES. 

"Inflectional  decay  was  the  chief  tendency  of  the  language 
in  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  centuries.  This  increased 
the  value  of  English  prepositions." 

In  English  the  prepositions  play  so  important  a  part  that 
they  are  really  of  more  weight  than  the  scanty  remains  of 
case  inflection. — SWEET. 

Their  importance  rises  in  proportion  as  a  nation  begins 
to  think  more  acutely  and  to  express  its  thought  more 
accurately. — M.  SCHELE  DE  VERB. 

Prepositions   were  originally  and  for  a  long  time 

219 


220  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

classed  with  conjunctions.  '  There  is  a  similarity  be- 
tween the  two  parts  of  speech,  yet  a  clear  differentiation 
should  be  made.  Conjunctions  are  primarily  sentence 
connectives.  Only  a  few  conjunctions  can  connect 
words,  and  these  only  in  co-ordinate  relations.  A 
preposition  connects  words,  yet  not  in  co-ordinate 
relations.  It  establishes  a  relation  of  dependence 
between  its  object  and  some  other  word,  thus  forming 
a  phrase  which  may  be  either  adjective  or  adverbial 
in  character,  according  to  the  nature  of  the  part  of 
speech  which  is  modified  by  the  phrase.  As  one  writer 
has  said,  "The  preposition  puts  a  noun  into  relation 
with  some  other  word  in  the  sentence." 

There  is  a  prevalent  idea  that  the  name  preposition 
was  given  to  this  class  of  words  because  they  are  placed 
before  nouns.  The  word  seems  to  have  come,  how- 
ever, from  the  fact  that  in  Greek  and  Latin  the  pre- 
position was  often  compounded  with  a  verb,  being 
placed  before  it  as  a  prefix.  The  same  thing  is  some- 
times found  in  English,  as  in  undergo. 

There  is  a  tradition  that  school  children  of  a  former 
generation  had  to  commit  to  memory  and  recite  verba- 
tim et  seriatim  the  list  of  English  prepositions.  Modern 
schools  certainly  do  not  follow  this  plan,  yet  pupils 
ought  to  be  familiar  with  the  prepositions  and  able 
t )  recognize  them  quickly. 

Many  of  the  prepositions  are  also  used  as  adverbs, 
as,  "He  came  in."  Sometimes  a  prepositional  adverb 
seems  to  be  a  part  of  the  verb  itself,  as,  "  to  be  addicted 
to,"  "to  laugh  at."  Some  grammarians  speak  of 


Prepositions 

"detached  prepositions,"  as  in  the  sentence  "I  don't 
know  what  he  is  thinking  of."  Such  prepositions 
have  very  nearly  an  adverbial  use;  yet  of,  though  often 
a  "detached  preposition,"  can  never  be  a  true  adverb. 

An  ancient  rhetoric  contains  the  rule  that  "A  pre- 
position is  not  a  good  word  to  end  a  sentence  with." 
Doubtless  in  some  cases  there  is  a  better  place  for  the 
preposition  than  at  the  end  of  the  sentence.  Yet  the 
English  idiom  allows  and  sometimes  prefers  this  posi- 
tion for  the  preposition.  "  What  did  you  ask  for  ?  " 
"  Whom  did  you  come  with  ?  "  are  stronger  sentences 
than  "  For  what  did  you  ask  ?  "  and  "  With  whom  did 
you  come  ?  " 

Some  of  the  prepositions  were  originally  participles, 
as,  respecting,  excepting,  etc.  There  is  also  a  large 
class  of  prepositional  phrase  forms,  that  are  usually 
treated  by  grammarians  as  one  word,  although  they 
will  admit  of  closer  analysis.  Such  are  "in  regard  to," 
"according  to,"  "in  spite  of,"  "by  means  of,"  and 
"for  the  sake  of."  In  "for  the  sake  of  peace,"  peace  is 
grammatically  the  object  of  of,  but  logically  it  is  the 
object  of  the  whole  phrase,  which  is  therefore  often 
treated  together  as  one  preposition. 

While  the  object  of  a  preposition  is  usually  a  noun 
or  pronoun,  a  phrase  or  a  clause  may  stand  in  this 
relation,  as,  "till  after  the  shower,9'  "Listen  to  what  I 
say."  An  adjective  or  an  adverb  may  also  take  the 
place  of  a  noun  as  the  object  of  a  preposition,  as,  "  till 
then,"  "on  high." 

The  time  honored  rule  that  "Prepositions  govern 


Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

the  objective  case*'  applies  of  course  only  to  the  seven 
words  in  English  that  have  an  objective  case  form. 
But  these  are  so  frequently  used  that  the  rule  is  of  con- 
siderable importance. 

The  English  student  should  distinguish  carefully  be- 
tween related  prepositions,  such  as,  between  and  among, 
at  and  in  before  names  of  places,  in  and  into,  etc. 
Much  care  should  be  taken  in  choosing  appropriate 
prepositions  to  convey  subtle  shades  of  meaning,  or  to 
follow  certain  words.  A  choice  of  prepositions  must 
often  be  made  in  such  phrases  as,  "  agree  with  or  to," 
" adapted  to  or  /or,"  "a  taste  of  or  /or,"  "correspond 
with  or  to,"  "reconcile  with  or  to,"  and  many  others. 
In  milking  such  choices  one  has  to  rely  mainly  on  his 
sense  of  idiom.  One  who  is  not  thoroughly  familiar 
with  English  usage  often  makes  mistakes  in  such 
points. 

The  use  of  for  before  an  infinitive,  and  of  than  as  a 
preposition  before  a  relative  pronoun,  was  common 
in  the  earlier  English,  as,  "for  to  see,"  "Beelzebub, 
than  whom,"  etc.,  but  both  of  these  usages  have  dis- 
appeared from  modern  English. 

Owing  to  the  various  and  subtle  shades  of  meaning 
which  prepositions  take,  they  are  less  intelligible  to 
foreigners  than  most  words,  and  are  therefore  less 
likely  to  be  adopted  into  other  languages.  The  exist- 
ence of  similar  prepositions  is  therefore  a  good  evidence 
of  affinity  in  languages. 

The  preposition  has  had  an  important  part  to  play 
in  the  tranbioriuation  of  English  from  a  highly  in- 


Prepositions 

fleeted  language  to  a  "logical"  one.  It  is  largely  by 
the  exchange  of  case-endings  for  prepositions  that  this 
has  been  done.  This  change  has  introduced  some 
new  possibilites  of  error  in  sentence  arrangements  and 
has  also  added  new  elements  of  freedom  and  of  strength 
to  the  language.  But  a  considerable  degree  of  training 
and  skill  is  needed  to  bring  fully  into  play  the  subtle 
powers  and  possibilities  of  the  English  prepositions. 


XLIV 

CONJUNCTIONS 

"In  the  order  of  nature,  the  conjunction  comes  last  among 
the  parts  of  speech.  It  proclaims  the  maturity  of  the  simple 
sentence.  The  need  of  conjunctions  did  not  come  until  the 
language  had  advanced  to  form  compound  sentences." 

Only  a  few  conjunctions  connect  words,  and  these  only 
on  an  equality. — CARPENTER. 

We  have  a  feeling  of  and,  a  feeling  of  if,  a  feeling  of  but, 
and  a  feeling  of  by,  just  as  really  as  a  feeling  of  blue  or  a 
feeling  of  cold. — JAMES. 

If  we  take  the  word  conjunction  in  its  widest  sense  we  may 
say  that  and,  and  that  (in,  I  know  that  it  is  true),  represent 
the  extremes  of  abstract  co-ordination  and  abstract  sub- 
ordination.— SWEET. 

The  gouty  joints  of  whereuntos  and  wherebys,  thereof s,  and 
tfcereiflttfi*.— SHAFTESBURY. 

A  good  literary  workman  is  at  once  to  be  known  by  his 
handling  of  connectives. — ARLO  BATES. 

"The  conjunction  shows  the  thought  connection  and  so 
makes  thinking  clear  and  accurate." 

It  is  in  the  right  use  of  these  (i.  e.,  the  connecting  terms 
or  particles),  that  the  brevity  and  clearness  of  good  style 
must  chiefly  consist. — LOCKE. 

As  regards  composition  generally  the  greatest  refine- 
ments and  the  most  common  inaccuracies  attend  the  four 
simple  conjunctions — and,  or,  but,  if. — BAIN. 

The  primary  office  of  a  conjunction  is  to  connect 

224 


Conjunctions 

sentences  (i.  e.  clauses),  but  since  clauses,  especially  if 
co-ordinate,  can  be  abridged  by  the  omission  of  like 
words,  a  very  few  of  the  conjunctions  have  extended 
their  use  to  connect  also  words  and  phrases  in  the 
same  construction,  as,  "  Will  you  take  cheese  or  butter  ?" 
Almost  all  such  connected  expressions  may  be  thought 
of  as  elliptical  forms  of  clauses;  but  the  most  important 
conjunction  and  (alone  among  the  connectives)  can 
connect  words  or  phrases  in  like  relations  even  when 
there  is  no  ellipsis  that  can  be  supplied,  as,  "  John  and 
Mary  are  a  happy  couple,"  "  Pompey  and  Caesar  were 
both  great  men."  We  may  say  therefore,  that  con- 
junctions connect  clauses,  and  occasionally  also,  words 
or  phrases  in  like  constructions. 

There  are  many  words  which  add  the  conjunctive 
office  to  some  other  function.  Such  are  the  relative 
pronouns,  relative  adjectives,  relative  adverbs,  and 
many  other  adverbs  which  are  not  relative. 

Conjunctions  are  of  two  main  classes,  co-ordinate 
and  subordinate.  A  co-ordinate  conjunction  connects 
clauses  or  parts  of  clauses  of  equal  rank.  These  con- 
nected clauses  may  be  either  principal  clauses  or  sub- 
ordinate clauses  holding  the  same  relationship  in  the 
sentence. 

The  most  common  co-ordinate  conjunctions  are 
and,  but,  and  or.  The  name  copulative  is  applied  to 
and  and  a  few  others  of  similar  meaning.  But  repre- 
sents another  small  group  called  disjunctive  or  adversa- 
tive conjunctions ;  and  or  represents  a  small  group  called 
alternative  conjunctions.  These,  however,  are  dis- 


Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 


Unctions  of  meaning  rather  than  of  grammatical  re- 
lation. For  is  a  co-ordinate  conjunction  with  causal 
signification  as,  "  He  will  do  it;  for  this  is  already  agreed 
upon."  For  is  to  be  distinguished  from  because, 
which  is  subordinate  and  adverbial  in  character.  For 
represents  the  objective  relations  of  events,  while 
because  shows  the  subjective  or  thought  relations  be- 
tween them. 

A  subordinate  conjunction  connects  a  subordinate 
clause  to  the  principal  one;  or,  more  strictly,  to  that 
word  in  the  principal  clause  which  the  subordinate 
clause  limits.  A  subordinate  conjunction  performs 
for  a  subordinate  clause  a  like  office  to  that  which  the 
preposition  does  for  its  object;  as  may  be  seen  from 
the  fact  that  the  same  word  may  often  be  used  either 
as  preposition  or  subordinate  conjunction  without 
change  of  its  essential  character,  as,  "  He  studied  until 
noon,"  "He  studied  until  the  teacher  came."  Yet  a 
conjunction  connects  without  governing,  while  a  prepo- 
sition governs  the  case  form  of  an  adjunct  pronoun. 

Subordinate  conjunctions  are  divided  according  to 
meaning  into  those  of  cause,  purpose,  comparison,  etc., 
but  the  classification  is  neither  very  definite  nor  com- 
plete. Most  of  the  subordinate  conjunctions  sustain 
also  more  or  less  of  an  adverbial  relation.  The  con- 
junction that  is  called  the  substantive  conjunction, 
because  its  chief  use  is  to  introduce  a  noun  clause,  as, 
"That  you  have  wronged  me  doth  appear  in  this,"  "I 
hope  that  you  will  do  it."  That  may  also  be  used  to 
connect  an  adverbial  clause  after  so  or  such. 


Conjunctions 

There  are  a  few  phrases  that  are  occasionally  used 
as  conjunctions.  Common  examples  are,  "as  if," 
"provided  that,"  "in  order  that,"  etc.  They  are 
really  elliptical  in  character,  however. 

There  are  many  connective  words  that  are  used  in 
pairs,  the  first  pointing  out  that  the  connection  is  to 
follow.  Such  are  both — and,  either — or,  not  only— 
but  also,  etc.  These  are  called  correlative  words  (i.  e. : 
having  a  mutual  relation)  and  are  usually  co-ordinate  in 
character;  but  if — yet,  and  a  few  other  pairs,  belong 
with  the  subordinate  connectives.  One  of  the  two 
correlative  words  is  frequently  an  adverb,  as,  "It  was 
so  hard  that  he  gave  it  up." 

And,  also  and  or,  among  the  co  -ordinate  conjunctions, 
and  if,  though  and  a  few  others  among  subordinate 
ones,  are  never  anything  except  conjunctions.  But, 
for,  since,  and  a  good  many  others  may  be  used  as 
prepositions  as  well.  Some  of  the  conjunctions  (es- 
pecially the  co-ordinate  ones)  are  sometimes  used  to 
introduce  sentences,  thus  forming  "  prepared "  sentences 
in  distinction  from  the  unprepared,  as, 

"And  seeing  the  multitudes  he  went  up  into  a  mountain." 

Or  sometimes  introduces  formally  a  long  paragraph, 
which  is  thus  logically  (though  not  grammatically)  con- 
nected with  what  goes  before.  Also,  too,  and  therefore 
are  frequently  used  in  a  similar  way. 

A  few  adverbs,  as  still,  nevertheless,  however,  are 
similarly  used  to  connect  logically  though  not  formally, 
and  these  are  sometimes  called  "half -conjunctions/' 


Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 


Certain  cumbrous  words  sometimes  used  are  made 
by  compounding  where  and  there  with  many  of  the 
prepositions,  as,  whereupon,  wherein,  thereafter,  there- 
unto. Those  compounded  with  where  are  generally 
used  as  connectives,  those  with  there  as  adverbs. 
Although  called  by  Campbell  "the  luggage  of  par- 
ticles," these  words  have  a  convenient  use  in  forming 
complex  sentences. 

The  conjunctions  are  really  few  in  number.  About 
twenty-three  words  have  been  enumerated  that  per- 
form most  of  the  conjunctive  offices  in  English.  But 
although  so  few  and  so  loosely  related  to  the  rest  of  the 
sentence,  conjunctions  form  an  important  element  of 
speech.  Coleridge  once  wrote,  "A  clear  reasoner  and 
a  good  writer  in  a  general  way  may  be  known  by  his 
pertinent  use  of  connectives." 


XLV 

INTERJECTIONS 

The  miserable  refuge  of  the  speechless. — HORNE  TOOKE. 

Primary  undifferentiated  language  material;  word  proto- 
plasm, so  to  speak. — DAVENPORT  AND  EMERSON. 

A  stepping-stone  to  true  language,  both  by  suggesting 
the  idea  of  articulate  speech  and  by  supplying  a  large  number 
if  not  the  entire  number  of  actual  roots. — MAX  MULLER. 

"An  interjection  implies  a  meaning  which  it  would  take 
a  whole  grammatical  sentence  to  expound,  and  it  may  be 
regarded  as  the  rudiment  of  such  a  sentence." 

In  conversation  they  serve  to  help  the  timid,  to  give 
time  to  the  unready,  to  keep  up  a  pleasant  semblance  of 
familiarity,  and,  in  a  word,  to  grease  the  wheels  of  talk. — 
DEAN  ALFORD. 

The  idle  word  is  not  quite  free  from  blame. — DEAN  ALFORD. 

Sacred  Interpreter  of  human  thought 

How  few  respect  or  use  thee  as  they  ought. — COWPER. 

Cry  "Hola"  to  thy  tongue,  I  prythee, 

It  curvets  unseasonably. — As  You  LIKE  IT. 

The  interjection  stands  among  the  parts  of  speech, 
but  it  is  not  really  of  them.  It  is,  rather,  "  a  whole 
speech,  characterized  by  a  maximum  of  brevity  and 
a  minimum  of  clearness."  In  this  respect  it  is  closely 
allied  to  the  gesture,  which  usually  gives  its  accom- 
panying force  to  the  ejaculation.  Emotion  is  quick. 
There  is  no  time  to  "fit  a  phrase."  Yet  speech  will 

229 


280  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

break  out  when  the  feelings  are  stirred;    hence,  the 
need  of  interjections. 

Although  the  interjection  is  said  to  be  independent  in 
its  sentence  relations,  other  words  may  depend  upon  it. 
In,  "O  that  I  had  wings,"  the  clause  "that  I  had 
wings"  is  the  object  of  a  verb  of  wishing  implied  in 

o. 

The  interjection  was  probably  the  primary  form  of 
articulation.  The  ones  first  used  may  have  had  an 
imitative  quality,  such  as  we  now  recognize  in  pop, 
bang,  ding-dong,  and  rub-a-dub.  The  best  command 
of  the  rhetoric  of  the  interjection,  perhaps,  belongs 
to  children,  and  also  to  savages  whose  peculiar  grunts 
contain  whole  areas  of  condensed  thought.  With 
civilization  the  use  of  interjections  diminishes,  and 
their  character  changes.  It  has  been  said  that  the 
degree  of  a  man's  civilization  can  be  pretty  fairly 
judged  by  the  expletives  which  he  uses.  There  are 
many  interjections  which  have  a  historic  meaning, 
and  some  are  truly  philological  in  character.  There  are 
whole  classes  of  literature,  however,  which  have  no 
interjections.  One  will  look  in  vain  for  them  in  treatises 
on  mathematics,  physical  science  or  history,  though 
these,  as  has  been  well  said,  "are  often  provocative 
of  interjections."  Fiction  and  oratory  make  large  use 
of  them ;  and  for  the  poet  the  interjection  is  an  im- 
portant part  of  his  stock  in  trade. 

In  conversation  these  ejaculatory  words  serve  some 
ends,  and  we  could  scarcely  do  without  them.  They 
fill  up  the  gaps.  They  put  the  listener  into  touch 


Interjections  231 

with  the  talker.  Even  in  writing  they  sometimes  give 
balance  to  a  halting  sentence.  Well  before  a  reply 
shows  that  one  does  not  wholly  repudiate  the  ques- 
tion even  if  he  cannot  fully  answer  it.  Why  rallies 
the  questioner,  or  puts  a  doubtful  aspect  upon  the 
subject  discussed.  But  useful  as  these  and  other  inter- 
jections are,  they  are  much  overworked  by  nervous  or 
unthinking  minds. 

The  early  grammarians,  wiser  perhaps  than  we, 
did  not  rank  the  interjection  as  a  part  of  speech.  It 
seems  to  have  slipped  into  the  list  at  a  later  era,  partly 
perhaps  to  preserve  the  historic  number  eight  after  the 
article  had  been  crowded  out,  and  other  "parts"  had 
become  differently  divided. 

Some  of  the  ancient  grammarians  classed  the  inter- 
jection with  the  adverb,  and  there  is  indeed  a  cognate 
relation  between  the  two.  Verily,  truly,  and  other 
modal  adverbs  have  a  strong  affinity  with  interjections. 
Yes  and  no,  though  sometimes  called  independent 
adverbs,  are  more  truly  interjections.  Each  of  them 
implies  a  statement,  as,  " It  is  so,"  or  "It  is  not  so,"  "I 
will  do  it,"  or  "I  will  not  do  it."  Many  of  the  com- 
monest interjections  are  adverbs  put  to  an  independent 
use,  as,  Here,  There,  Now,  Why,  Well. 

But  there  are  other  interjections  that  are  closely 
related  to  the  verb,  such  as,  Hold,  Hush,  Halt,  Whoa, 
Gee,  Haw,  See  here,  Look  out. 

There  are  many  vapid  and  meaningless  expletives, 
while  others  are  fraught  with  tremendous  meaning. 
Colorless  words  often  grow  into  interjections  and 


Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

become  current,  but  afterwards  sink  out  of  sight  again. 
Changes  come  faster  in  the  interjectional  vocabulary 
than  in  any  other.  There  is  also  more  local  and  in- 
dividual variation  in  this  linguistic  department  than 
in  others. 

There  are  old  historic  interjections  long  disused, 
which  one  often  meets  in  reading  the  English  classics 
and  which  may  be  found  in  our  dictionaries.  Such 
are  Marry,  Gramercy,  Zounds,  and  Well-a-way.  La 
was  a  feeble  expletive  much  in  vogue  among  feminine 
fiction  characters  of  the  eighteenth  century.  There 
are  several  religious  responses,  having  a  wide-spread 
and  important  use,  that  are  classed  with  the  interjec- 
tions. Such  are  All  Hail,  the  Selah  of  the  Hebrew 
Psalms,  Hallelujah  and  its  Greek  form  Alleluia.  Such 
also  is  the  great  response  of  prayerful  souls  through 
all  the  ages,  Amen. 

Many  of  the  literary  interjections  are  seldom  heard 
in  conversation.  Such  are  Lo,  Alas,  Behold,  Hail, 
//  tizzd,  Ileigh-ho.  There  are  others,  however,  having 
a  dictionary  recognition,  that  are  in  common  use 
orally  as  well,  such  as  Whew,  Hurrah,  Pooh,  and 
Indeed. 

One  often  makes  a  limited  number  of  interjections 
cover  a  wide  range  of  meanings.  In  Oh  we  may  find 
surprise,  joy,  pain,  disgust,  pity,  and  a  whole  gamut  of 
emotions,  according  as  the  tone  of  voice  may  reveal 
or  circumstances  decree. 

There  is  a  tendency  of  late  to  obliterate  the  spelling 
distinction  between  the  emotional  interjection  oh, 


Interjections  233 

and  the  vocative  0  that  comes  to  us  from  the  Latin 
and  is  almost  like  a  prefix  to  the  following  name,  as, 
"O  Lord."  But  there  is  some  gain  to  the  language 
in  retaining  the  distinction,  which  we  hope  may  not 
be  wholly  obliterated. 

It  is  a  lamentable  fact  that  interjections  show  an 
almost  universal  tendency  to  verge  towards  the  expres- 
sions of  profanity.  Many  of  the  historic  interjections 
Were  originally  mild  oaths.  Thus  Zounds  is  a  con- 
traction of  "God's  wounds,"  and  "Marry"  came  into 
use  through  the  practice  of  swearing  by  the  Virgin 
Mary. 

The  word  of  prayer,  or  praise,  or  imprecation,  used 
in  the  highest  emotional  states,  is  easily  drawn  upon 
and  degraded  to  express  less  intense  or  lower  emotions. 
People  whose  high  moral  sense  or  refined  taste  would 
never  sink  to  the  use  of  "Billingsgate"  often  use  ex- 
pressions that  are  everywhere  current,  but  are  essentially 
forms  of  prayer  or  cursing  that  have  become  more  or 
less  disguised  by  conventional  spelling  or  the  cloak 
of  a  foreign  synonym. 

Such  modern  expressions  as  "Gracious,"  "Good 
Lord,"  "Good  Heavens,"  "Diable,"  "Mon  Dieu," 
show  how  extensively  the  appellations  of  God  and 
of  his  Satanic  Majesty  have  entered  into  the  ejacula- 
tory  language.  Among  this  class  of  words  and  phrases, 
there  are  some,  such  as  "Good-bye,"  and  "Adieu," 
which  are  rich  and  important  contributions  to  the 
English  tongue.  Others  also  have  achieved  an  inno- 
cent and  respectable  position,  for  even  the  most  refined 


234  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

and  modest  mind  is  scarcely  repelled  by  such  a  modified 
form  of  language  as  reveals  itself  in  "O  dear" 
"(ODieu)." 

One  should  not  underestimate  the  sin  and  vulgarity 
of  profane  expressions.  Yet  there  is  less  real  difference 
perhaps,  between  the  "profane  swearing"  of  the  saloon, 
and  the  conventionalized  expletives  of  the  "Club," 
than  may  at  first  appear. 

The  use  of  interjections  is  a  difficult  but  important 
subject  for  the  teacher  to  deal  with.  To  prevent  the 
use  of  expletives  would  be  impossible.  But  to  curb 
the  tendency,  to  direct  it,  to  help  the  children  to  under- 
stand the  real  nature  of  the  interjections  they  use,  and 
to  cultivate  their  taste  so  that  only  refined  and  ex- 
pressive ones  shall  find  utterance  from  their  lips  is  one 
of  the  important  parts  of  the  language  teaching  of 
American  schools. 


XLVI 

SENTENCES  AND  CLAUSES 

A  sentence  is  a  completely  worded  statement,  inquiry,  or 
command. — LEWIS'S  APPLIED  GRAMMAR. 

"Every  group  of  words  having  a  verb  is  grammatically 
a  sentence." 

"A  sentence  is  a  word  or  group  of  words  whose  form 
makes  us  expect  it  to  express  a  full  meaning.  We  say 
expect  because  it  depends  on  the  context  whether  or  not 
any  sentence  expresses  a  complete  meaning." 

Exclamatory  sentences  are  closely  akin  to  interrogative 
and  are  usually  placed  in  that  class. — CARPENTER. 

The  Ideal  Sentence. — It  should  be  powerful  in  its  substan- 
tives, choice  and  discreet  in  its  adjectives,  nicely  correct  in 
its  verbs.  Withal,  there  must  be  a  sense  of  felicity  about 
it,  declaring  it  to  be  the  product  of  a  happy  moment,  so  that 
you  feel  that  it  will  not  happen  again  to  that  man  who  makes 
the  sentence,  nor  to  any  other  of  the  sons  of  men,  to  say 
the  like  thing  so  choicely,  tersely,  mellifluously,  and  com- 
pletely.— SIR  ARTHUR  HELPS. 

The  sentence  is  the  primary  unit  of  language  in  form 
as  well  as  in  thought.  Words  and  phrases  can  only 
be  dealt  with  grammatically  as  parts  of  the  sentence. 
A  study  of  the  general  plan  of  the  sentence  is  therefore 
necessary  at  the  beginning  of  a  course  in  grammar. 

Sentences  are  classified  according  to  their  general 
form  and  meaning  into  declarative,  interrogative, 
imperative  and  exclamatory  sentences.  Thus: 

235 


236  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

You  will  do  it. — Declarative. 
Will  you  do  it? — Interrogative. 
Do  it. — Imperative. 
How  well  you  do  it! — Exclamatory. 

The  student  of  grammar  needs  to  examine  carefully 
the  structural  differences  in  these  classes  of  sentences. 

Some  writers  on  grammar  omit  the  exclamatory 
sentence  as  a  distinct  type.  Sentences  in  this  form 
are  rare.  They  also  approach  the  interrogative  in 
form,  beginning  with  a  word  that  is  in  its  nature  inter- 
rogative (haw  or  what)  though  the  word  order  differs 
from  that  of  the  usual  interrogative  sentence.  Declara- 
tive, interrogative  and  imperative  sentences  that  are 
short  and  emphatic  are  often  logically  exclamatory  and 
are  punctuated  as  such. 

There  are  various  types  of  the  assertive  (or  declara- 
tive) sentence  determined  chiefly  by  the  character  of 
the  verb,  as, 

The  apple  is  a  fruit. — Verb  copulative. 
Dogs  bark. — Verb  intransitive. 
Bees  make  honey. — Verb  transitive. 
Honey  is  made  by  the  bees. — Verb  passive. 
You  forget  yourself. — Verb  reflexive. 
It  rains. — Verb  impersonal. 

There  are  also  negative  sentences: 

Old  form.— I  like  it  not. 
Modern  form. — I  do  not  like  it. 

Every  group  of  words  containing  a  verb  and  subject 
is  by  some  grammarians  called  a  sentence.  But  sen- 


Sentences  and  Clauses  237 

tences  can  be  combined  into  complex  and  compound 
sentence-wholes,  and  it  is  convenient  to  have  some 
other  word  than  sentence  for  the  smaller  sentences 
within  the  larger  sentence.  The  term  clause,  rather 
than  sentence,  is  generally  used  to  refer  to  a  subject  and 
predicate  that  forms  one  of  the  parts  of  a  complex  or  a 
compound  sentence. 

Clauses  are  either  principal  or  subordinate,  and 
subordinate  clauses  may  be  adjective,  adverbial,  or  noun 
clauses  according  to  their  relation  in  the  complex  sen- 
tences to  which  they  belong. 

A  noun  clause  is  usually  connected  by  the  substan- 
tive conjunction  that.  It  may  be: 

Subjective. — That  it  should  fail  was  inevitable. 
Objective. — I  hope  tha£_jie  will  come. 
Predicative. — The  reply  was  that  he  had  already  written  it. 
Appositive. — The  wish  that  he  may  succeed  is  very  general. 

A  sentence  may  be  only  partly  compound,  as,  "  He  is 
tall,  but  not  strong."  "  John  and  not  Mary,  was  there." 
Sentences  that  are  logically  connected  are  often  put 
together  without  a  conjunction,  as,  "  The  grass  is  green, 
the  sky  is  blue."  Some  writers  would  put  into  several 
sentences  what  others  would  punctuate  as  one.  A 
succession  of  such  short  and  logically  connected  sen- 
tences is  sometimes  called  a  sequence. 

A  clause  (or  sentence)  is  sometimes  interjected  as  a 
parenthesis  into  another  sentence,  as,  "I  understand 
(and  this  view  is  confirmed  by  others)  that  the  matter 
had  already  been  decided  by  the  action  of  the  com- 


Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

mittee."  The  grammatical  relationship  of  such  an 
interjected  sentence  to  the  principal  one  is  not  always 
tin;  same  as  the  logical  one.  In  the  sentence,  "He 
thinks,  I  believe,  that  the  world  belongs  to  him,"  that 
^hich  is  really  the  principal  sentence  is  logically  the 
object  of  believe. 

In  the  evolution  of  language  the  order  of  sentence 
development  seems  to  be  as  follows: 

First. — The  isolated  sentence. — He  went  away. 

Second. — Parallel  sentences. — He  went  away.     I  am  sorry. 

Third. — The  compound  sentence. — He  went  away  and  I 
am  sorry. 

Fourth. — The  complex  sentence. — I  am  sorry  that  he 
went  away. 

The  development  of  a  child's  language  usually 
follows  this  order  of  sentence  growth. 

Although  the  sentence  as  a  whole  must  be  studied  at 
the  beginning  of  the  grammar  course  the  clauses  of  a 
complex  sentence  cannot  be  fully  discussed  until  the 
study  of  the  parts  of  speech  has  thrown  some  light  upon 
the  relations  of  these  larger  component  parts  of  sen- 
tences. 


PHRASES 

A  large  proportion  of  the  elements  of  sentences  are  not 
single  words,  but  combinations  or  groups  of  words. — GREEN'S 
ENGLISH  ANALYSIS. 

Each  of  the  parts  of  speech  has  what  we  may  call  a  power 
of  extension;  that  is,  it  may  consist  of  a  group  of  words,  i.  e.t 
a  phrase  or  a  clause. — CARPENTER. 

A  phrase  is  a  combination  of  two  or  more  words,  not  in- 
cluding a  subject  and  predicate,  having  in  a  sentence  the 
office  or  value  of  a  single  part  of  speech,  and  capable  of 
being  regarded  and  parsed  as  such. — WHITNEY. 

There  is  no  good  reason  for  giving  special  prominence  to 
prepositional  phrases  over  others. — BROWN  AND  DEGARMO. 

A  sentence  can  be  broken  up  into  as  many  phrases  as  there 
are  groups  of  two  or  more  words  connected  in  meaning, 
which,  taken  together,  perform  the  office  of  a  part  of  speech. 
— BROWN  AND  DEGARMO. 

Groups  of  words  in  sentences  are  often  used  to  per- 
form the  function  of  a  single  part  of  speech.  When 
such  a  word  group  contains  a  subject  and  predicate 
it  is  a  clause.  When  it  has  no  verb  within  it,  it  is  a 
phrase.  Phrases  are  named  from  the  part  of  speech 
whose  office  they  hold,  as  noun  phrases,  adjective 
phrases,  adverbial  phrases,  etc. 

Phrases  are  also  called  participial,  infinitive,  and 

239 


£40  (!  raw  mar  and  Its  Reasons 

prepositional  phrases  according  as  the  nucleus  of  the 
phrase  is  a  participle,  an  infinitive,  or  a  preposition 
and  its  object.  A  word  of  any  part  of  speech,  however, 
as  a  noun,  adjective  or  adverb,  to  which  grammatical 
modifiers  may  be  joined,  can  become  the  basis  of  a 
phrase. 

Verbs,  participles,  and  infinitives  have  many  phrase 
forms,  which  are  usually  treated  as  wholes,  but  admit 
of  further  analysis.  Prepositional  and  conjunctive 
phrases,  such  as,  "provided  that,"  "for  the  sake  of," 
"  in  order  that,"  are  usually  elliptical  and  capable  of 
analysis,  though  it  is  often  better  to  treat  them  as  wholes. 

A  phrase  can  be  very  long  and  very  complex  in 
structure.  Participial  and  infinitive  phrase  construc- 
tions are  often  of  great  length.  (See  Chapter  48,  on 
" Abridged  Clauses.") 

Phrases,  as  well  as  clauses,  are  sometimes  inter- 
jected into  sentences  with  which  they  have  a  logical 
rather  than  a  grammatical  connection,  as,  "Your  ad- 
mission, to  .speak  very  frankly,  goes  further  than  you 
intended." 

A  knowledge  of  the  parts  of  speech  is  necessary  before 
tin;  student  can  deal  intelligently  with  the  word  groups 
in  sentences.  Yet  the  analysis  of  a  given  sentence 
should  deal  first  with  these  larger  wholes  and  after- 
wards with  the  individual  words. 


XLVIII 
ABRIDGED  CLAUSES 

"The  absolute  or  independent  use  of  the  participle  is  one 
of  those  constructions  which,  while  entirely  well  supported 
by  authority  yet  seems  somewhat  out  of  harmony  with  the 
idiomatic  spirit  of  the  English  tongue.  Probably  all  writers 
of  standing  sometimes  employ  this  form." 

The  grammarian  does  not  make  rules  to  teach  us  to  speak 
and  write  correctly,  but  he  calls  attention  to  the  method 
employed  by  writers  and  speakers  whose  methods  of  writing 
and  speaking  are  approved  by  the  educated  section  of  the 
community.  When  we  speak  of  an  expression  as  ungram- 
matical  or  "bad  grammar,"  we  simply  mean  that  educated 
people  do  not  approve  of  its  employment. — SWEET. 

There  are  many  participial  and  infinitive  expressions 
which  may  be  thought  of  as  abridged  clauses,  and 
which  may  contain  certain  subjective,  copulative, 
and  attributive  elements,  as, 

For  him  to  be  absent  is  unusual;  i.  e.,  That  he  should  be 
absent,  etc. 

He  being  absent,  I  took  his  place;  i.  e.t  Because  he  was 
absent,  etc. 

These  are  not  strictly  clauses,  but  are  often  called 
infinitive  and  participial  clauses. 

In  an  infinitive  construction  of  this  kind,  the  pronouns 
used  will  be  in  the  objective  case;  hence  the  rule  of  the 
old  grammars,  "  The  subject  of  an  infinitive  is  in  the 

241 


242  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

objective  case."  Yet  there  is  always  a  verb,  or  a 
preposition  (usually  for)  that  governs  this  case-form. 
In  the  sentence,  "  I  want  him  to  come,"  him  is  called 
the  subject  of  to  come,  but  its  case-form  is  determined 
by  its  relation  to  the  preceding  verb.  Whenever  an 
objective  attribute  is  an  infinitive  the  expression  falls 
into  this  class  of  constructions. 

An  abridged  adverbial  clause  usually  takes  the  par- 
ticipial form  and  is  called  an  absolute  phrase  or 
the  absolute  construction.  Thus,  "He  being  ab- 
sent," is  an  abridgment  of  the  adverbial  clause  "Be- 
cause he  was  absent."  When  such  absolute  phrases 
occur  in  Latin  they  require  that  their  parts  should 
agree  with  each  other  in  the  ablative  case.  In  Greek 
the  genitive  is  the  absolute  case.  In  modern  English 
the  nominative  case  is  used  in  these  constructions,  as, 
"It  being  he,  I  went  to  meet  him."  In  Old  English, 
however,  the  dative  was  used  as  the  absolute  case. 

About  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century  the 
dative  began  to  be  replaced  by  the  nominative;  or 
perhaps,  as  the  dative  case-endings  disappeared,  the 
form  began  to  be  felt  as  the  nominative  case  of  the 
noun,  and  the  pronoun  finally  fell  into  the  same  case 
by  analogy.  Yet  there  are  instances  in  later  literature 
where  this  old  dative  (now  represented  by  the  objective 
form  of  the  pronoun)  occurs.  Milton  often  uses  par- 
ticipial expressions  preserving  the  old  dative  form, 
or  possibly  imitating  the  Latin  construction,  as, 

"Us  dispossessed,  the  seat  of  the  Deity  supreme 
He  trusted  to  have  seized." 


Abridged  Clauses  •      243 

» 

"Dagon  hath  presumed,   me  overthrown, 
To  enter  lists  with  God." 

Such  expressions  are  historically  correct,  though 
modern  English  is  decidedly  in  favor  of  the  nominative 
as  the  absolute  case. 

Absolute  participial  phrases,  though  grammatically 
allowable,  do  not  seem  entirely  in  harmony  with  the 
English  language  and  are  less  used  than  formerly,  as 
writers  generally  prefer  a  more  direct  form  of  expression. 

There  is  a  certain  class  of  nearly  independent  parti- 
cipial phrases  which  like  modal  adverbs  limit  an  entire 
statement,  as, 

Generally  speaking,  the  figurative  use  of  a  word  is  derived 
from  its  sense. — JAMES. 

Judging  from  many  hereditary  anecdotes  this  peculiar 
temper  was  hardly  less  than  a  monomania. — HAWTHORNE. 

The  very  chin,  modestly  speaking,  was  as  long  as  my  whole 
face. — ADDISON. 

For  the  abridgment  of  a  substantive  clause  either  a 
participial  or  an  infinitive  form  may  be  used. 
Thus: 

"I  never  thought  that  it  was  he,"  may  become 
"I  never  thought  of  its  being  he,"  or, 
"I  never  thought  it  to  be  him." 

These  substantive  abridged  clauses  usually  follow 
such  verbs  as  wish,  think,  desire,  perceive,  etc. 

Not  every  substantive  clause  can  be  thus  abridged, 
however.  Thus,  "I  said  that  I  would  do  it"  cannot 
take  either  the  infinitive  or  the  participial  abridged 
form. 


£44  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

For  the  abridgment  of  an  objective  clause  after  think 
and  a  few  other  verbs  the  participle  is  generally  used 
and  the  subject  term  is  put  into  the  possessive  thus 
limiting  the  participle,  as, 

I  never  thought  of  his  going  so  soon  (i.  e.,  that  he  would 
go  so  soon.) 

I  did  not  think  of  its  being  he  (i.  e.,  that  it  was  he.) 

In  such  sentences  modern  English  generally  uses 
the  nominative  absolute  for  the  case  form  of  an  attri- 
butive pronoun,  though  the  vacillation  of  case  form 
in  such  sentences  as,  "It  is  I,"  "It  is  me,"  leaves  an 
opportunity  for  variation  here,  especially  in  the  first 
person,  as,  "  He  did  not  think  of  its  being  me." 

(See  Chapter  54  on  "Case  Shif tings  of  Pronouns.") 
Instead  of  the  possessive  case  before  the  participle, 
however,  the  objective  is  occasionally  used,  and  the 
participle  then  takes  the  adjective  relation,  as, 

Would  you  mind  me  asking  you  a  few  questions? — • 
STEVENSON. 

Instead  of  the  better  form, 
"Would  you  mind  my  asking,"  etc. 

In  the  abridgment  of  substantive  clauses  after  most 
verbs  the  infinitive  form  is  used.  Even  with  the  verb 
think,  this  is  sometimes  the  case,  as, 

I  wish  him  to  be  my  messenger  (i.  e.,  that  he  should  be 
my  messenger.) 

I  did  not  think  it  to  be  him  (i.  e.,  that  it  was  he.) 

In  such  sentences  the  attributive  pronoun  after  the 


Abridged  Clauses  245 

infinitive  takes  the  objective  case  because  of  its  relation 
to  the  subject  of  the  infinitive.  A  question  is  some- 
times asked  as  to  the  case  of  an  attributive  noun  or 
pronoun  following  the  copula  to  be  when  there  is  no 
subject  of  the  infinitive,  as, 

To  be  a  lawyer  is  his  desire. 
He  wishes  to  be  a  lawyer. 

Would  the  genius  of  the  English  language  use  a  nomi- 
native for  the  absolute  case  in  such  a  sentence,  or  would 
the  association  with  the  infinitive  suggest  the  objective 
as  the  case  to  be  used  ?  The  question  is  purely  specu- 
lative, however,  as  there  are  no  instances  in  English 
literature  where  a  pronoun  is  used  in  such  a  connection. 
Indeed  it  seems  impossible  to  imagine  an  instance  in 
which  a  well  written  sentence  could  contain  such  a 
pronoun ;  or  if  we  could  conceive  of  such  a  use,  it  would 
be  wholly  problematical  what  view  the  writer  would 
take  of  the  necessary  relations. 

In  other  words,  it  is  possible  to  raise  grammatical 
questions  whose  discussion  would  have  neither  practical 
nor  educative  value.  In  the  light  of  common  sense, 
the  use  of  a  sentence  involving  such  a  hazy  grammatical 
question  would  be  a  blemish  on  rhetorical  style,  and 
contrary  to  the  genius  of  the  English  language. 


XLIX 

WORD  ORDER 

Languages  tend  on  the  whole  more  and  more  to  utilize 
word  order  for  grammatical  purposes. — JESPEBSEN. 

Inflectional  forms  serve  for  a  device  for  clearness  in  lan- 
guages careless  of  word  order. — DAVENPORT  AND  EMERSON. 

When  the  relations  between  words  are  shown  by  word 
order,  concord  is  not  of  much  use,  and  consequently  is  re- 
ducible to  very  narrow  limits  in  such  a  language  as  English, 
Conversely,  in  a  highly  inflected  language  with  a  highly 
developed  system  of  concord,  such  as  Latin,  fixed  word 
order  is  not  required  to  show  the  grammatical  relations  of 
words. — SWEET. 

The  mere  fact  that  in  English  the  pupil  is  obliged  to  get 
the  meaning  of  the  sentence  from  the  order  of  the  words 
and  from  a  logical  insight  into  the  contents  of  the  thought, 
with  little  or  no  aid  from  the  form  of  the  words — this  fact 
makes  the  study  of  English  grammar  a  more  abstract  and 
difficult  and  disciplinary  subject  than  the  grammar  of  any 
highly  inflected  speech. — BARBOUR. 

The  freedom  of  arrangement  required  in  poetry  makes  it 
somewhat  superior  to  prose  as  a  means  of  expelling  from  a 
pupil's  mind  the  delusion  that  word  order  is  a  safe  guide  to 
grammatical  construction. — HARPER  AND  BURGESS. 

The  substitution  of  word  order  for  flexions  means  a  vic- 
tory of  spiritual  over  material  agencies. — JESPEBSEN. 

246 


Word  Order  247 

We  have  in  mind  an  established  order,  the  "regular  pat- 
tern of  thought,"  and  also  a  psychological  order,  a  con- 
scious arrangement  to  give  effect. — KELLNER. 

The  rigidity  of  English  word  order  is  often  much  exag- 
gerated; it  is  hardly  rigid  at  all. — HARPER  AND  BUBGESS. 

The  change  of  English  from  an  inflected  to  a  non- 
inflected  language  has  had  many  subtle  effects  upon 
the  language  as  a  means  of  expression.  It  has  relieved 
us  of  the  burden  of  learning  many  forms  and  has  given 
us  large  freedom  in  the  logical  relationship  of  words. 
It  has  made  it  possible  for  a  word  to  hold  several  rela- 
tionships at  once,  and  thus  has  added  new  elements 
of  force  to  expression.  But  it  has  also  made  certain 
requirements  more  stringent.  Word  order  has  acquired 
grammatical  significance,  and  so  has  become  more 
specific  and  obligatory. 

Old  English  with  its  large  elements  of  concord  had 
very  wide  freedom  in  the  order  of  its  words.  There 
was  little  possibility  of  a  word's  getting  detached  in 
thought  from  its  proper  relations,  since  the  form  showed 
so  emphatically  its  logical  connections.  In  the  changes 
that  occurred  in  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  century, 
inflections  dropped  away,  and  word  order  became  more 
fixed.  Either  the  establishment  of  word  order  made 
agreements  needless  so  that  they  fell  away,  or  else 
the  inflections  having  decayed  the  word  order  of  neces- 
sity became  more  rigid,  or  more  probably  still,  each 
process  was  in  some  degree  the  effect  of  the  other. 

The  parts  of  speech  and  their  functions  are  largely 
dependent  upon  the  position  that  the  words  occupy. 


248  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Almost  any  change  in  word  order  is  likely  to  give 
some  change  in  syntactical  relations.  Thus  when 
several  adjectives  limit  the  same  noun  the  one  is  placed 
nearest  which  expresses  the  most  essential  and  perma- 
nent quality.  This  adjective  limits  the  noun  aloin-, 
while  each  preceding  adjective  limits  the  noun  as  modi- 
fied. Thus  in  the  phrase,  "  a  poor  old  colored  woman  " 
age  is  more  inherent  than  poverty  but  less  so  than  race 
relations.  So  "colored"  is  made  to  limit  "woman" 
alone,  while  "old"  and  "poor"  limit  the  whole  phrase 
following.  The  question  of  the  order  to  be  observed 
when  a  cardinal  and  an  ordinal  numeral  are  connected 
in  the  same  phrase  (three  first,  or  first  three)  is  of  this 
nature.  The  order  depends  on  the  question  as  to  which 
of  the  two  numerals  expresses  the  most  inherent  and 
primary  idea.  (See  Chapter  29.) 

Adverbs  are  perhaps  the  words  that  show  most  lia- 
bility to  lose  their  right  connections,  though  pronouns 
and  participles  also  have  a  way  of  escaping  from  their 
normal  positions  in  the  sentence. 

Most  that  we  know  of  word  order  in  English  comes 
to  us  unconsciously  and  it  is  difficult  to  put  matters  so 
subtle  into  the  form  of  rules.  Indeed,  many  grammars 
are  entirely  silent  on  the  important  subject  of  word 
order.  The  general  principle,  "Keep  the  parts  that 
are  related  near  together,"  is  the  chief  one  that  can  be 
consciously  applied  in  making  English  sentences. 

Yet  early  in  the  grammar  course  the  attention  of  the 
student  should  be  definitely  given  to  the  natural  order 
of  parts  in  assertive  and  interrogative  sentences.  Ex- 


Word  Order  249 

amples  of  common  inverted  types  should  also  be  ex- 
amined and  the  advantages  gained  by  the  inversion 
should  be  estimated.  These  advantages  are  some- 
times grammatical,  making  the  relation  of  the  parts 
more  evident,  and  sometimes  purely  rhetorical,  as  in 
"Great  is  Diana  of  the  Ephesians."  The  rhetoric 
of  a  sentence  (even  more  than  its  grammatical  relations) 
is  very  dependent  upon  questions  of  word  order.  Even 
when  clearness  and  grammatical  correctness  are  both 
present,  a  change  of  word  order  will  often  give  force 
and  elegance  to  a  halting  sentence. 

Poetry  uses  inversion  far  more  than  prose.  Even  the 
verb  in  poetry  is  sometimes  allowed  to  begin  an  assertive 
sentence,  as, 

Rose  a  nurse  of  ninety  years, 

Took  his  child  upon  her  knee. — TENNYSON. 

Putting  an  adverb  at  the  beginning  of  a  sentence  is  a 
common  way  of  causing  an  inversion  in  word  order, 
as, 

"Now  fades  the  glimmering  landscape  on  the  sight." 

The  poetical  device  of  placing  an  adjective  after  its 
noun,  as,  "pastures  green,"  "tresses  brown,"  merely 
for  metrical  effect,  is  frowned  upon  by  some  critics. 
Yet  all  will  agree  that  a  greater  freedom  of  word  order 
in  poetry  than  is  admissible  in  prose,  is  not  only  a  proper 
" poetical  license"  but  a  true  means  of  giving  poetic 
beauty.  To  make  a  prose  paraphrase  of  a  piece  of 
poetry  may  not  be  of  great  value  as  an  exercise  in  com- 
position, but  as  a  study  of  word  order  (by  comparison 


250  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

of  the  word  order  of  prose  and  poetry)  it  has  some 
genuine  value. 

Inversion  is  rare  in  a  dependent  clause  of  English. 
It  sometimes  occurs,  however,  as  in  the  expression, 
"as  much  as  in  me  lies."  In  Old  English,  though  its 
word  order  was  on  the  whole  much  more  free  than 
ours,  there  were  a  few  restrictions  that  the  modern 
language  has  freed  itself  from.  The  verb  of  a  dependent 
sentence  was  usually  deferred  to  the  end,  as  in  German, 
thus  demanding  a  more  strained  attention.  The 
word  order  that  was  introduced  by  French  influence 
after  the  Conquest  was  of  a  lighter  and  brighter  kind. 

The  study  of  the  word  order  of  specific  sentences, 
the  comparison  of  word  order  in  different  classes  of 
sentences,  and  the  noting  of  changes  in  meaning  made 
by  changes  in  arrangement,  form  an  important  part  of 
grammatical  study.  Also  a  comparison  of  the  word 
order  of  the  English  sentence  with  the  unlike  idioms 
of  German  or  with  the  freer  word  order  of  Latin,  is 
a  good  way  to  throw  added  light  upon  the  characteristics 
of  the  English  tongue. 


GOOD  USAGE 

The  rules  of  grammar  have  no  value  except  as  statements 
of  fact.  Whatever  is  in  general  use  in  a  language  is  for  that 
reason  grammatically  correct. — SWEET. 

However  language  may  be  abused,  the  usage  which  gives 
law  to  speech  is  still  that  usage  which  is  founded  on  the  com- 
mon sense  of  mankind. — GOOLD  BROWN. 

The  genius  of  a  language  unconsciously  presiding  over 
all  its  transfigurations  and  conducting  them  to  a  definite 
issue,  will  have  been  a  far  truer,  far  safer,  guide  than  the 
artificial  wit,  however  subtle,  of  any  single  man  or  any 
association  of  men. — TRENCH. 

The  English  which  we  ought  to  speak  and  write  derives 
its  authority,  not  from  the  dicta  of  grammarians  and  lexi- 
cographers, but  from  the  slowly  evolved  will  of  the  nation. 
— WELSH. 

We  are  not  of  those  who  are  the  obedient  slaves  of  re- 
lentless grammatical  rules,  but  those  whose  usage,  barring 
slips,  makes  or  mends  them. — N.  Y.  Independent. 

Everyone  knows  that  the  ultimate  standard  for 
correctness  in  language  is  good  usage,  but  where 
is  the  authority  that  shall  tell  us  beyond  a  doubt  what 
good  usage  is  ? 

The  French  have  their  "Academic,"  founded  in 
1635,  and  consisting  of  "Forty  Immortals,"  elected 
for  life.  This  body  meets  twice  a  week  at  the  Palace 

251 


252  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Mazarin  in  Paris,  and  constitutes  "  the  highest  authority 
on  everything  appertaining  to  the  niceties  of  the  French 
language,  to  grammar,  rhetoric,  and  poetry,  and  the 
publication  of  the  French  classics." 

The  literary  journals  of  England  and  America  have 
sometimes  called  upon  their  readers  to  vote  for  the 
"  Forty  Immortals"  of  these  respective  nations.  It  is 
a  harmless  and  interesting  pastime.  But  the  distin- 
guished writers  thus  voted  for  do  not  "stay  elected." 
Literary  reputations  rise  and  fall.  And  where  is  the 
literary  journal  whose  clientage  has  authentic  power 
and  prestige  to  pronounce  upon  the  proper  membership 
of  such  a  tribunal  ? 

We  are  often  told — and  in  general  it  must  be  agreed — 
that  only  "present,  reputable,  and  national  usage'' 
can  be  considered  good.  But  even  in  these  forceful 
adjectives  there  is  some  debatable  territory. 

When  a  poet  uses  for  poetic  reasons  an  archaic 
word,  it  is  often  better  poetic  usage  than  the  modern 
term  would  be.  It  may  be  said,  however,  that  tho 
occasional  use  of  archaic  terms  is  really  "present" 
usage  in  the  field  of  poetry. 

When  a  Shakespeare,  or  a  Tennyson,  or  a  Kipling 
introduces  a  word  or  phrase  not  hitherto  received 
into  good  linguistic  society,  but  which  seems  appro- 
priate to  the  occasion,  the  new  term  is  very  likely 
to  l>ecome  at  once  "reputable."  Even  a  lesser  genius 
has  sometimes  the  happy  inspiration  to  match  an 
occasion  with  a  word  or  phrase  that  proves  its  right 
to  live. 


Good  Usage  253 

Yet  the  practice  of  one  writer,  or  of  several  writers, 
or  of  one  or  more  periodicals,  however  high  they  may 
stand  in  the  world's  estimation,  cannot  alone  make 
an  expression  "reputable."  Nor  is  the  wide-spread 
use  of  a  term  a  sure  guarantee  of  its  respectability. 
'You  often  hear  it"  is  no  proof  that  it  is  in  good  repute. 
There  must  be  something  in  the  word  or  phrase  itself 
which  is  fitted  to  call  out  the  uniform,  or  nearly  uniform, 
support  of  those  whom  the  world  deems  worthy  to  decide 
such  questions,  or  else  its  linguistic  standing  rests  on  an 
insecure  basis. 

But  it  is  the  question  of  national  usage  that  gives 
the  largest  room  for  variations  of  opinion.  There  is 
many  a  word  or  phrase  of  limited  territorial  extension 
that  is  in  good  repute  in  the  region  where  it  is  "at 
home."  Perhaps  it  is  a  language  growth,  and  will 
finally  conquer  the  whole  field.  It  is  not  always  needful 
to  frown  upon  a  word  because  some  parts  of  the  national 
domain  have  not  yet  heard  of  it. 

Or,  if  universality  of  acceptance  be  requisite,  why 
stop  with  the  national  idea  ?  The  niceties  of  the 
English  tongue  would  seem  to  be  a  more  promising 
field  for  an  Anglo-American  alliance  than  is  to  be 
found  along  political  lines.  Language  has  a  larger 
empire  than  any  single  nation.  This  is  more  fully 
recognized  than  it  used  to  be.  English  hypercriti- 
cisms  of  "  American  English"  and  American  super-sensi- 
tiveness as  to  English  opinions  regarding  the  same, 
are  being  outgrown  together.  America  and  England 
are  both  in  the  jury  box  in  deciding  the  standards 


254  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

of  the  mother  tongue  which  is  our  common  heritage. 

But  if  America — then  the  same  is  true  of  each  part 
of  our  large  domain — the  South  and  the  North,  the 
West  as  well  as  the  East.  And  if  England  and  America, 
—then  also  Australia,  and  the  new  English-speaking 
peoples  that  are  growing  up  in  Africa  and  Asia  and 
the  islands  of  the  Pacific. 

In  other  words,  language  movements  defy  terri- 
torial limits,  and  if  a  language  has  within  itself  the 
qualifications  that  tend  to  make  it  a  world  language, 
there  cannot  be  any  sectional  or  national  authority 
that  has  power  to  judge  all  its  usages. 

But  while  we  have  no  authoritative  tribunal  that 
can  settle  all  our  linguistic  questions,  we  believe  that 
we  are  better  off  than  the  French  because  of  this  fact. 
It  is  not  an  authority  for  good  usage  that  an  educated 
person  needs,  but  a  knowledge  of  the  principles  that 
guide  usage,  and  the  habit  of  mind  that  will  enable 
him  to  be  both  a  leader  and  a  follower  in  his  relation 
to  the  usages  of  his  generation. 

Under  fsuch  conditions  there  will  be  both  sectional 
and  individual  differences  in  usage,  which  help  to 
make  life  interesting,  and  are  not  to  be  wholly  de- 
precated. Yet,  after  all,  it  is  only  in  colloquial  English 
that  large  differences  occur,  and  it  is  not  with  these 
that  English  grammar  is  chiefly  concerned.  The 
principles  of  English  grammar  are  derived  by  the 
inductive  study  of  the  usages  found  in  the  standard 
literary  works  that  are  written  in  the  English  tongue. 
These  standard  works  arc  read  wherever  the  language 


Good  Usage  255 

is  spoken,  and  give  a  degree  of  unity  to  the  language  of 
all  localities.  The  usages  of  literary  English  change 
with  the  generations,  but  the  changes  are  slowly  evolved, 
and  are  the  result  of  the  combined  thought  of  the  whole 
mass  of  educated  people.  The  literary  use  of  a  language 
has  a  somewhat  stable,  as  well  ,as  nearly  universal, 
basis,  and  is,  in  general,  "present,  reputable,  and 
international"  in  character. 


M 

IDIOMS 

Idiom  is  the  dress  and  fashion  of  experience. — PEGGE'S 
ANECDOTES  OF  THE  ENGLISH  LANGUAGE. 

"Isolated  forms  that  are  survivals  sometimes  go  against 
our  grammatical  sense." 

The  idiom  of  language  admits  only  of  being  observed. 
Let  no  man  ask  why. — BUTTMAN. 

"Idiom  is  not  seen  in  full  force  so  long  as  we  can  recon- 
cile it  to  grammatical  structure.  There  is  something  arbi- 
trary and  masterful  about  true  idiom." 

There  is  much  forcible  English  that  cannot  be  parsed. — 
ALLEN. 

Many  of  the  puzzles  of  word-parsing  arise  from  asking  of 
English  what  it  does  not  give,  or  rather  has  given  up. — 

JOYNES. 

The  attempt  to  adjust  the  words  of  an  idiom  to  grammati- 
cal rules  would  be  an  attempt  to  rob  our  tongue  of  some  of 
its  choicest  elements  of  life  and  strength. — TOWNSEND. 

If  any  rules  stand  in  the  way,  so  much  the  worse  for  the 
rule. — BRANDER  MATTHEWS. 

The  peculiar  mould  in  which  a  language  shapes 
itself  is  the  idiom  of  the  language.  Every  language  has 
many  peculiarities  that  belong  to  itself  alone.  The 
idioms  show  the  modes  of  thought  that  belong  to  the 
people  that  speak  the  language. 

256 


Idioms  257 

Idiom  in  its  largest  sense,  includes  all  special  mean- 
ings given  to  groups  of  words,  as,  "How  do  you  do  ?" 
and  "Look  out;"  also  variation  from  the  general  rules 
of  agreement,  as,  "It  is  they"  All  special  cases  of 
diction  and  of  the  government,  arrangement  or  agree- 
ment of  words,  in  which  one  language  differs  from 
others,  belong  to  its  idiomatic  structure.  Thus  the 
placing  of  the  past  participle  of  a  verb  phrase  at  the 
end  of  the  sentence  is  an  important  idiom  of  the  German 
tongue. 

"The  sun  rises  at  six"  is  idiomatic  English,  while 
the  French  idiom  is  a  phrase  that  translated  literally 
would  be  "at  six  hours  of  the  morning."  The  use 
of  the  present  tense  with  a  future  meaning,  as,  "  He  is 
going  home  to-morrow"  is  also  an  English  idiom. 

The  sentence,  "How  long  have  you  been  here?" 
though  it  seems  simple  and  natural  to  the  native  En- 
glishman, is  nevertheless  an  idiom.  "How  long  are 
you  here?"  is  the  form  which  the  sentence  takes  in 
general  grammar.  Natives  of  other  countries  tell  us 
that  it  seems  to  them  absurd  to  say  "  have  been  "  while 
one  is  still  here.  Idiomatic  expressions  cannot  be 
classified  by  analogy  but  must  be  studied  one  by  one. 

Every  teacher  of  a  foreign  language  knows  well  the 
mongrel  kind  of  expression  called  "  translation  English, " 
which  retains  some  of  the  peculiarities  of  one  language 
while  using  the  words  of  another.  It  requires  a  far- 
reaching  knowledge  of  both  languages  to  transfer 
perfectly  the  thought  of  a  well-written  production  of 
one  to  an  equally  well-written,  production  of  the  other. 


258  Grammar  nml  Its  Reasons 

Indeed  it  is  a  question  whether  it  ever  can  be  perfectly 
transferred,  as  the  thought  itself  is  shaped  partly  by 
the  mode  of  its  expression.  Even  the  most  successful 
translation  seldom  has  as  vigorous  a  style  as  the  original. 

The  foreigner  who  has  learned  to  speak  "correct 
English"  seldom  gets  above  a  certain  "  bookishness " 
in  his  speech  which  he  himself  is  probably  unaware  of ; 
and  owing  to  our  long-continued  national  isolation 
it  is  doubtless  still  more  rare  for  an  American  to  acquire 
perfectly  the  idiomatic  command  of  a  foreign  tongue. 

An  illustration  of  the  difficulty  which  one  finds  in  an 
attempt  to  express  himself  in  a  foreign  idiom,  may  be 
given  by  certain  quotations  taken  from  examination 
papers  of  the  Porto  Rican  teachers  who  during  the 
summer  of  1904  studied  at  Harvard  and  Cornell  Uni- 
\vrsities: 

"We  not  talk  English  often,  not  can." 

"We  like  stay  very  much." 

"Columbus  fell  over  his  knees  to  tell  his  downfall  to  Isa- 
bella." 

"Isabel  is  six  years  "old  and  is  therefore  on  time  to  attend 
school." 

"If  Jefferson  don't  would  make  other  important  tiring 
in  his  public  life,  this  notable  work  have  would  being  enough 
to  make  him  live  in  the  hearts  of  the  American  people." 

But  in  his  efforts  to  translate,  a  foreigner  sometimes 
gets  a  more  conscious  knowledge  of  the  idiom  of  the 
new  language  than  the  native  possesses  who  has  ur- 
oonsciously  been  using  the  correct  idiom  all  his  life. 
The  scholar  needs  not  only  to  be  able  to  speak  and 


Idioms  259 

write  his  native  language  correctly,  but  to  know  why 
he  uses  the  idioms  which  he  does;  to  be  able  also  to  test 
them,  to  interpret  them  to  others.  He  also  needs  to 
gain  from  his  knowledge  of  language  a  knowledge  of 
his  own  forms  of  thinking  and  so  to  be  led  into  more 
logical  and  cogent  lines  of  thought  itself. 

There  are  many  idioms  of  local  extension  within  a 
given  language.  Those  which  are  true  idioms  (and 
not  merely  expressions  loose  in  syntax)  are  of  real 
value  and  give  flavor  to  life  and  to  literature.  American 
idioms  are  different  from  those  heard  in  England, 
while  in  different  parts  of  America  there  are  great 
differences  in  the  colloquial  idioms  in  current  use. 

Idiom  is  more  fundamental  than  dialect  and  far  less 
local  and  temporary.  Colloquial  language  is  more  idio- 
matic than  the  language  of  literature.  Thus  in  spoken 
language,  contractions  of  the  negative  verb  phrases,  as, 
"I  can't,'"4  Ym  don't,"  etc.,  are  constantly  used,  and 
are  preferred  to  the  unabridged  form,  but  this  idiom  is 
excluded  for  the  most  part  from  the  language  of  books. 

Slang  expressions,  if  they  are  of  such  a  nature  as  to 
be  permanently  valuable,  may  finally  become  idiomatic, 
but  it  takes  time  for  them  to  become  approved  and  to 
grow  into  idiom.  A  good  idiom  is  old,  while  good 
similes  and  metaphors  in  language  should  be  new. 
Most  of  the  slang  that  is  invented  is  not  permanently 
valuable  and  never  grows  into  idiom.  There  are  also 
various  peculiar  expressions  which  we  hear  and  see, 
that  are  not  at  all  idiomatic,  but  are  the  result  of  loose 
and  illogical  thinking,  Even  the  native  needs  a  critical 


260  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

taste  and  acumen  to  be  able  to  distinguish  always 
between  the  idiom  of  a  language  which  is  its  strength, 
and  the  confusions  of  loose  thought  or  doubtful  syntax 
Vhich  are  the  weakness  of  linguistic  expression. 

Unusual  expressions,  if  they  are  true  idioms,  are 
forcible  and  give  vivacity  and  flavor  to  life  and  to  lit- 
erature. But  while  all  true  local  and  colloquial  idioms 
are  of  interest,  it  is  the  idioms  of  literary  English 
that  grammar  is  chiefly  concerned  with. 

In  dealing  with  the  general  traits  of  English  we  have 
been  dealing  with  its  idiomatic  character.  But  there 
are  also  many  special  words  and  phrases  having  an 
idiomatic  character  that  engage  the  attention  of  the 
philologist. 

Among  idiomatic  English  phrases  may  be  named, 
"many  a  man,"  "a  great  many,"  "this  many  years," 
"the  more  the  merrier,"  "what  with  this,  what  with 
that,"  "  by  and  bye,"  "ever  and  anon,"  "so  to  speak," 
"of  course,"  "to  be  sure,"  "the  house  is  building." 
The  older  English  had  many  idiomatic  phrases  not 
now  in  use,  as,  "the  tane  and  the  tother,"  "go  to 
now,"  "good  your  ladyship,"  "dost  hear?,"  "have 
at  you."  "Knock  me  at  the  gate,"  and  "He  went 
strange  countries  for  to  see,"  also  contain  idioms. 

Among  idioms  of  syntax  may  be  named,  the  omis- 
sion of  the  conjunction  that  in  substantive  clauses,  as, 
"  I  knew  it  was  he;"  the  use  of  the  double  or  cumulative 
genitive,  as,  "This  child  of  ours;"  the  retained  object 
in  the  passive  voice  with  the  indirect  object  made  the 
subject,  as,  "I  was  shown  some  pictures;"  and  the  use 


Idioms  261 

of  the  sign  to  to  take  the  place  of  the  whole  infinitive, 
as,  "I  asked  him  not  to." 

One  markedly  peculiar  class  of  idiomatic  English 
phrases  is  represented  by  "had  rather,"  "had  as  lief," 
with  others  similarly  formed.  (See  Chapter  53.) 

In  dealing  with  the  more  peculiar  idioms  of  English, 
many  grammarians  make  it  their  effort  to  explain  away 
all  deviations  from  general  grammar  and  so  make 
it  appear  that  the  peculiar  phrase  is  "not  much  of  an 
idiom"  after  all.  "How  shall  I  dispose  of  this?  "  is 
the  common  grammatical  formula.  But  to  explain 
away,  is  not  to  explain.  And  why  should  we  "  dispose 
of"  our  idioms?  We  ought  indeed  to  try  to  interpret 
them.  The  student  of  language  should  face  firmly, 
and  deal  frankly  with,  these  expressions  that  puzzle 
the  grammarians.  Every  irregularity  arises  by  devia- 
tion from  some  regularity,  and  historic  grammar  will 
frequently  do  much  to  elucidate  idiomatic  mysteries. 

But  since  one  of  the  most  common  causes  of  irregu- 
larity is  confusion  of  thought,  the  peculiar  phrase  should 
be  called  on  to  "  show  its  credentials. "  We  should  draw 
as  clear  a  line  as  possible  between  true  idiom,  and  loose 
syntax,  or  slang  which  has  overstepped  right  bounds. 

The  proper  grammatical  way  to  treat  an  idiom  then, 
is  to  test  it — to  accept  it  if  it  is  good,  and  reject  it  if  of 
doubtful  value;  also  to  explain  its  history  if  historical 
grammar  reveals  such  an  explanation. 

Then,  if  it  really  belongs  to  the  genius  of  the  language 
the  way  to  dispose  of  it  is  to  call  it  by  its  true  name 
idiom,  and  let  it  go. 


LH 

IMPERSONAL  VERBS  AND  SENTENCES 

An  abundance  of  impersonal  verbs  is  a  mark  of  an  early 
stage  in  language,  denoting  that  a  speaker  has  not  yet  ar- 
rived so  far  in  development  as  to  trace  his  own  actions  and 
feelings  to  his  own  agency. — ABBOTT. 

The  business  of  the  grammarians  and  the  verbal  critics 
is  not  to  make  language  or  prescribe  rules,  but  more  modestly 
to  record  usage,  and  to  discover  the  principles  which  may 
underlie  the  incessant  development  of  our  common  speech. 
— BRANDER  MATTHEWS. 

In  every  language  there  are  certain  idiomatic  forms 
that  express  in  a  general  way  facts  that  are  not  explicitly 
referred  to  any  specific  agency.  Such  sentences  are 
called  impersonal  sentences,  and  the  verbs  that  belong 
to  such  sentences  are  impersonal  verbs.  Thus,  rains, 
hails  and  snows  are  impersonal  or  unipersonal  verbs. 

The  earlier  English  abounded  in  impersonal  sen- 
tences which  had  a  somewhat  different  form  from 
those  used  at  present.  The  impersonal  verb  was 
usually  accompanied  by  a  dative  construction,  ;is, 

Me  remembereth  of  the  day  of  doom. — CHAUCER* 

"Whether  lyketh  you  better,"  sayd  Merlyn,  "the  sword 
or  the  scabbard?"  "Me  lyketh  better  the  sword,"  sayd 
another. — MALORY. 

Many  of  the  old    impersonals  were  subjunctive  ]r 

262 


Impersonal  Verbs  and  Sentences  263 

their  verb  forms,  as,  "Me  were  liever,"  "him  hadde 
rather."  Out  of  these  certain  peculiar  modern  idioms 
have  developed.  (See  Chapter  53.) 

As  the  dative  usually  preceded  the  verb  it  came  to  be 
thought  of  in  time  as  a  kind  of  psychological  subject. 
A  small  remnant  of  these  old  datives  is  found  in  the 
words  "methinks"  and  "methought"  which  though 
archaic  are  still  in  recognized  poetical  use.  A  collo- 
quial expression  sometimes  vulgarly  used,  "Thinks  I 
to  myself,"  however,  has  no  grammatical  nor  any  other 
authority. 

Later  the  pronoun  it  came  into  use  as  a  kind  of  ex- 
pletive subject  for  these  impersonal  verbs,  and  the 
dative  object  then  followed  the  verb.  Thus,  "Me 
remembereth"  became  "It  remembereth  me." 

Examples : 

It  yearns  me  not. — SHAKESPEARE. 
It  would  pity  any  living  eye. — SHAKESPEARE. 
I'll  dispose  them  as  it  likes  me  best. — MARLOWE. 
It  recks  me  not. — MILTON. 

The  dative  construction  in  these  sentences  is  clearly 
allied  to  the  dative  object  sometimes  found  in  sentences 
not  impersonal  in  form,  as,  "Knock  me  at  the  gate." 
And  from  such  sentences  one  may  pass  by  easy  grada- 
tions to  the  indirect  objects  in  ordinary  modern  use,  as, 

Dance  me  no  dance. 
Saddle  me  the  horse. 
Bring  me  the  book. 


264  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Modern  English  has  replaced  most  of  the  old  imper- 
sonate with  other  idioms  or  with  personal  forms.  Thus, 
"Loth  him  was"  has  become  "He  was  loth."  The 
old  subjunctives  with  had  are  now  "I  had  rather," 
"He  had  as  lief,"  "You  had  better,"  etc.  Instead  of 
"If  it  pleases  you,"  we  now  say  "If  you  please,"  or 
simply,  "Please,  do  so  and  so." 

But  although  the  old  impersonal  usage  is  mostly 
obsolete,  writers  occasionally  revive  it  for  poetic  effect. 
Thus  Walter  Scott  wrote:  " 

When  in  Salamanca's  cave 

Him  listed  his  magic  wand  to  wave, 

The  bells  would  ring  in  Notre  Dame. 

LAY  OP  THE  LAST  MINSTREL. 

Modern  English  retains  in  common  use  a  few  im- 
personal forms  though  without  all  the  marks  of  the 
ancient  impersonals. 

Among  these  are  "What  ails  you?"  "It  pains  me," 
and  most  common  of  all,  those  describing  the  weather, 
as,  "It  is  cold,"  "It  freezes."  Modern  impersonals 
usually  have  it  for  the  expletive  subject,  and  this  is 
therefore  called  the  impersonal  pronoun.  It  has  a  simi- 
lar expletive  use  when  the  real  subject  is  an  infinitive  or 
a  clause  following  the  verb,  as, 

It  is  pleasant  to  walk  on  the  beach. 
It  is  too  bad  that  he  should  do  so. 

There  has  a  similar  expletive  use,  as, 

There  is  a  pleasure  in  the  pathless  wood. 
He  would  go  if  there  were  need. 


Impersonal  Verbs  and  Sentences  265 

All  of  these  sentences  are  therefore  allied  to  the 
impersonal  sentences  of  the  older  English. 

Another  important  class  of  modern  sentences  having 
a  kind  of  impersonal  character  includes  those  in  which 
It  stands  as  the  subject,  while  the  sentence  attribute 
may  have  any  person,  number  or  gender,  as,  "It  is  I," 
"  It  is  they,"  "  It  is  the  boys."  The  early  form  of  these 
sentences  had  a  different  verb  agreement,  as,  "It  am  I," 
or  "I  am  it,"  which  is  similar  to  the  German  of  to-day. 
"Ich  bin  es."  Thus  Wycliffe  and  Tyndale  wrote  in 
their  Scripture  translations,  "I  it  am." 

Although  the  nominative  is  the  recognized  case  for 
the  attribute  in  such  sentences,  Dean  Alford  and  some 
other  writers  have  contended  for  the  propriety  of  the 
objective  form,  especially  in  colloquial  usage  and  in 
the  first  person,  as,  "It  is  me."  These  sentences  have 
an  analogy  to  such  expressions  as,  "C'est  moi"  in 
French  and  other  languages. 

A  few  indefinite  expressions  in  modern  colloquial 
English  have  a  kind  of  impersonal  meaning.  Thus 
the  French  "Ondit"  (one  says)  has  its  counterpart 
in  the  English  "They  say."  In  modern  usage,  how- 

r,  Mrs.  Grundy  is  sometimes  made  the  scapegoat 
for  irresponsible  gossip.  A  similar  lack  of  personality 
sometimes  occurs  in  the  use  of  you,  as  "  He  was  so  thin 
that  you  could  almost  look  through  him."  This 
impersonal  and  familiar  use  of  you  is  common  in  con- 
versation, and  a  few  writers  have  made  use  of  it  in 
literary  writings,  though  it  could  easily  become  a 
mannerism. 


266  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Example : 

The  house  was  a  low,  tumble-down  affair.  You  could  see 
in  a  moment  that  it  was  the  house  of  a  family  in  humble 
life. — STEVENSON. 

The  editorial  "we"  has  also  a  little  of  this  general  or 
impersonal  character. 

The  subject  of  impersonal  sentences  and  their  modi- 
fied modern  forms  is  a  most  interesting  one  to  the 
student  of  historical  and  comparative  grammar. 


LIII 

HAD  RATHER,  HAD  BETTER,  HAD  AS  LIEF 

Idioms  have  their  kindred  as  well  as  men. — JESPERSEN. 

Idioms  not  understood,  like  men  in  the  same  situation, 
are  sure  to  be  misunderstood. — LOUNSBURY. 

One  of  the  most  peculiar  of  all  English  idioms  is  the 
use  of  had  with  rather,  better,  as  lief,  etc.,  as,  "I  had 
rather  do  it  than  not."  Such  phrases  seem  to  con- 
tradict the  logic  of  language,  and  have  given  great 
trouble  to  writers  on  grammar. 

It  is  perhaps  enough  for  practical  purposes  to  know 
that  all  these  phrases  have  the  sanction  of  good  and 
abundant  literary  usage  from  an  early  period,  and 
that  their  history  can  be  traced  through  natural  pro- 
cesses of  language  from  original  language  forms.  Yet 
some  knowledge  of  this  history,  as  well  as  of  certain 
peculiar  considerations  that  are  influencing  present 
usage  in  regard  to  each  specific  phrase,  is  also  desirable 
for  the  advanced  student  of  English  grammar. 

In  an  article  entitled  The  Story  of  an  Idiom,  in 
Harper's  Magazine  for  June,  1904,  Professor  Louns- 
bu  ry  of  Yale  Unixersity  has  traced  in  a  very  compre- 
hensive way  the  history  of  these  phrases,  acknowledging 
however,  as  an  aid  in  this  Work,  the  investigations  of 
Dr.  Fitzedward  Hall  nearly  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago. 
It  is  from  this  article  by  Professor  Lounsbury  that 

267 


268  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

much  of  the  material  has  been  gathered  for  the  following 
brief  discussion  of  the  history  and  nature  of  this  class  of 
idiomatic  phrases. 

The  first  traces  of  this  idiom  are  found  in  subjunctive 
i  mpersonal  sentences  containing  the  comparative  of  lief 
or  liev  (meaning  dear)  and  a  dative  personal  pronoun, 
as, "  Me  were  liefer,"  i.  e. :  "  It  would  be  dearer  to  me. " 
Similar  sentences  were  formed  with  the  subjunctive  of 
have  which  meant  to  hold,  as,  "Him  hadde  it  liefer," 
i.  e.:  "It  would  be  held  dearer  to  him."  Later  the 
dative  of  the  pronoun  was -changed  for  the  nominative. 

These  impersonals  with  liefer  or  liever  are  often  met 
with  in  the  writings  of  Chaucer,  as, 

Liefer  I  had  to  dien  on  a  knife 
Than  thee  offende,  trufc  deare  wife. 

* 
For  about  two  hundred  years  "had  liefer"  was  in 

full  sway,  but  in  the  fifteenth  century  a  rival  phrase 
"had  rather"  sprang  up,  conveying  the  same  idea 
with  a  different  word.  This  grew  rapidly  and  finally 
drove  "had  liefer"  almost  entirely  out  of  use.  In 
Shakespeare's  plays  "had  rather"  occurs  many  times, 
but  "had  liefer"  not  at  all.  "Had  liefer"  was  not 
wholly  extinguished,  however,  and  Tennyson  revives 
the  old  phrase  in  his  poem  Enid. 

Far  liever  had  I  gird  his  harness  on  him 

A  descendant  of  the  phrase  is  in  full  colloquial  use 
to-day  in  the  positive  form  "had  as  lief." 

In  the  phrase  "had  rather"  which  thus  supplanted 


Had  Rather,  Had  Better,  Had  as  Lief       269 

"had  liefer,"  rather  seems  to  have  been  thought  of  as  an 
adjective  as  liefer  had  been.  It  being  the  comparative 
of  rathe,  meaning  early,  or  quick,  the  phrase  "  had 
rather"  carried  the  meaning  of  "hold  it  quicker"  or 
"more  desirable."  Thus  the  Bible  verse  "I  had 
rather  be  a  doorkeeper  in  the  house  of  my  God," 
may  be  paraphrased  as,  "  I  hold  it  preferable  to  be  a 
doorkeeper,"  etc. 

For  a  long  time  the  phrase  was  accepted  naturally 
without  close  analysis.  But  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
when  English  began  to  be  studied  critically,  it  was 
inevitable  that  so  peculiar  a  phrase  as  "had  rather" 
should  attract  attention,  and  become  the  object  of 
criticism  from  those  who  did  not  understand  it.  The 
corresponding  phrase  "had  better"  was  also  in  occa- 
sional use,  and  had  been  from  an  early  period,  having 
been  first  used  in  the  original  form  "me  were  better" — 
a  form  which  was  never  in  use  with  rather.  But  "  had 
better"  had  never  come  into  extensive  use,  and  was 
now  rarely  heard.  "Had  liefer"  also  had  gone  out  of 
use,  so  the  force  of  the  grammarian's  attack  fell  only 
on  "had  rather."  In  all  other  connections  ratfier  had 
come  to  have  an  adverbial  instead  of  an  adjective  use, 
so  that  the  incongruity  of  the  phrase  was  sensibly  felt. 
Dr.  Johnson  in  his  dictionary  of  1755  defines  "to  have 
rather"  as  "to  desire  in  preference,"  but  adds,  "This 
is,  I  think,  a  barbarous  expression  of  late  intrusion 
into  our  language,  for  which  it  is  better  to  say  will 
rather."  In  Sheridan's  grammar,  a  few  years  after- 
wards this  thought  is  repeated. 


270  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

• 

Lowth's  grammar  of  1762  adds  to  this  misinterpre- 
tation of  the  idiom  by  advancing  the  theory  that  the 
proper  form  was  "I  would  rather,"  that  this  had  been 
contracted  into  "I'd  rather"  and  then  erroneously 
expanded  into  "I  had  rather."  This  ingenious  ety- 
'mology,  for  which  there  is  no  justification  in  fact,  be- 
came for  a  long  time  the  accepted  solution.  It  was 
adopted  into  the  early  editions  of  Webster's  Dictionary, 
and  may  be  found  in  some  of  the  nineteenth  century 
grammars.  Recent  dictionaries  and  grammars,  how- 
ever, have  corrected  this  misinterpretation,  giving  the 
true  origin  and  history  of  the  phrase,  and  have  endorsed 
it  as  a  true  English  idiom  that  has  had  an  accepted 
literary  use  from  an  early  period. 

l  But  while  "had  rather"  has  been  reinstated  among 
the  approved  literary  idioms  of  English,  it  is  undeniable 
that  the  use  of  "had  rather"— both  the  literary  and 
especially  the  colloquial  use — has  declined  in  modern 
times  in  favor  of  the  newer  phrase  "would  rather." 
Although  "would  rather"  lacks  the  ancient  prestige 
that  belongs  to  "had  rather,"  it  does  say,  even  if  a  little 
i  mperfectly,  what  it  is  intended  to  say.  While  in  "  had 
rather"  both  words  are  used  in  a  somewhat  archaic 
sense  and  relationship,  in  "would  rather"  the  verb 
is  used  in  its  modern  sense,  and  rather  sustains  its  usual 
adverbial  relation.  But  in  spite  of  the  growth  of 
"would  rather"  it  is  not  likely  that  "had  rather"  will 
share  the  fate  of  "had  liefer"  and  be  abandoned  as  a 
true  idiom  of  the  English  tongue. 

Although  "had  liefer,"    "had  rather"    and    "had 


Had  Rather,  Had  Better,  Had  as  Lief       271 

better  "were  originally  formed  after  the  same  pattern  of 
speech,  the  history  and  present  status  of  "  had  rather" 
and  "had  better"  are  by  no  means  alike.  "Had 
better"  developed  very  slowly  into  general  use,  but 
in  recent  years  it  has  become  very  common  and  it  is 
more  frequent  than  "had  rather"  in  modern  English 
literature.  The  phrase  also  has  positive  and  superla- 
tive forms,  "had  as  good,"  and  "  had  best."  But 
while  "had  rather"  has  in  a  sense  accommodated  itself 
to  the  modern  sense  of  idiom  by  suggesting  for  rather 
a  quasi-adverbial  character,  this  cannot  so  easily  be 
clone  for  good,  better  and  best. 

The  analogy  of  "would  rather"  has  also  inaugurated 
the  doubtful  phrase  "would  better"  which  is  now  oc- 
casionally met  with  in  speech  and  in  newspaper  English. 
In  the  words  of  Professor  Lounsbury,  "This  is  as 
ungrammatical  as  it  is  unidiomatic.  What  the  one 
who  employs  it  really  says  ...  is  that  he  would 
do  so  and  so  better  than  something  else.  What  he  is 
trying  to  say  is  that  it  would  be  better  for  him  to  do  so 
and  so  instead  of  something  else." 

In  the  phrases  "had  rather"  and  "had  better,"  the 
tendency  of  both  rather  and  better  to  suggest  an  ad- 
verbial instead  of  an  adjective  use,  has  also  led  to  the 
employment  of  other  adverbs  in  the  same  connection, 
and  "had  sooner/'  "had  as  soon,"  "had  as  well,"  are 
sometimes  heard.  The  propriety  of  these  may  be 
questioned,  but  as  to  the  original  consistency  of  "had 
rather"  and  "had  better"  with  the  true  idioms  cf 
English,  there  is  no  question. 


LIV 

CASE  SIIIFTINGS  OF  PRONOUNS* 

"It  la  me,"  a  stereotyped,  idiomatic,  colloquial  form  used 
by  the  masses,  and  shunned  by  the  fastidious.  "It  is  I," 
more  literary  and  formal,  used  by  those  with  strong  feeling 
for  grammatical  consistency. — CARPENTER. 

It  is  only  the  influence  of  ignorant  grammarians  that  pre- 
vents such  phrases  as  ''It  is  me"  from  being  adopted  into 
the  written  language  and  acknowledged  in  the  grammars. — 
SWEET. 

"It  is  me  '  is  an  expression  which  every  one  uses.  Gram- 
marians (of  the  smaller  order)  protest;  schoolmasters  (of  the 
lower  kind)  prohibit  and  chastise;  but  English  men,  women, 
and  children  go  on  saying  it,  and  will  go  on  saying  it  as  long 
as  the  English  language  is  spoken. — DEAN  ALFORD. 

"It  seems  as  if  the  last  refuge  of  'whom'  is  the  construc- 
tion 'than  whom*  where  it  had  originally  nothing  to  do." 

Every  error  in  grammar  might  be  established  if  frequent 
usage  or  the  occasional  slips  of  good  authors  are  to  be  ac- 
cepted as  final  authority. — MARSHALL  T.  BIGELOW. 

When  the  English  language  gets  in  my  way  it  doesn't 
stand  a  chance. — HENRY  WARD  BEECHER. 

The  case  distinctions  of  the  pronouns  are  often 
obscure  or  variable.  Grammatical  laws  have  always 
seemed  to  have  a  weak  hold  on  the  case  forms  of  the 

MESPEBSEN'S  Progress  in  Language  (London,  1894)  has 
an  important  chapter  on  Case-Shiftings. 

272 


Case  Shift  in(js  of  Pronouns 

pronouns,  so  that  a  mere  point  of  euphony  has  some- 
times been  held  to  justify  variation.  These  case 
shifting  are  of  great  interest  to  philologists  and  there 
is  much  divergence  of  opinion  as  to  what  should  be  the 
allowed  liberty  in  this  field. 

We  have  already  noticed  (See  Chapter  52  on  "  Im- 
personal Sentences")  the  somewhat  widespread  use 
of  the  expression,  "It  is  me."  It  is  allied  to  the  old 
impersonal  sentences  containing  datives,  and  also  has 
an  analogy  to  certain  expressions  in  other  languages,  as 
the  French  "C'est  moi,"  where  the  nominative  form 
je  is  never  used.  In  America  the  nominative  form, 
"It  is  I,"  has  been  generally  approved  as  the  literary 
form,  but  the  objective  is  frequent  in  colloquial  usage 
and  is  approved  by  some  grammarians  as  correct. 
This  form  of  construction  is  less  frequent  in  the  third 
person  than  in  the  first  and  second,  though  sometimes 
heard. 

Dean  Alford,  however,  who  contends  strongly  for 
the  correctness  of  "It  is  me,"  thinks  the  same  construc- 
tion should  be  extended  to  the  other  pronouns  as  well. 
But  regarding  the  Scripture  expression  "  It  is  I,  be  not 
afraid,"  he  says:  "This  shows  us  why  the  nominative 
should  be  sometimes  used.  The  majesty  of  the  speaker 
and  his  purpose  of  reassuring  his  disciples  .  .  .  point 
out  to  us  the  case  in  which  it  Would  be  proper 
for  the  nominative  and  not  the  accusative  to  be  used." 
As  a  grammatical  argument,  however,  this  may  not 
seem  wholly  convincing. 

In  commenting  on  the  difference  in  this  usage  among 


274  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

the  three  persons  Dr.  Latham,  in  his  History  of  the 
English  Language,  points  out  that  "me  is  not  the 
proper,  but  only  the  adopted  accusative  of  7,  being 
in  fact  a  distinct  and  independent  form  of  the  personal 
pronoun."  He  argues  therefore  that  "me  and  ye 
may  be  called  indifferent  forms,  nominative  as  much  as 
accusative  and  accusative  as  much  as  nominative. 
Him  and  her  on  the  other  hand  are  not  indifferent. 
The  m  and  r  are  respectively  the  signs  of  other  cases 
than  the  nominative." 

Perhaps,  however,  phonetic  influence  is  in  a  measure 
the  reason  why  pronouns  of  the  first  and  second  per- 
sons are  more  free  than  those  of  the  third  person  to  use 
their  accusative  forms  in  these  predicate  constructions. 
The  forms  me,  and  thee,  are  thus  brought  into  har- 
monious relation  with  we,  ye,  he,  and  she,  thus  making 
more  orderly  set  of  phrases  for  this  predicate  relation. 

In  the  line, 

"Be  thou  me,  impetuous  one." 

found  in  Shelley's  Ode  to  the  West  Wind,  the  use  of 
me  gives  a  desirable  poetic  euphony,  which  the  nomi- 
native case  could  not  give. 

In  "Fare  thee  well,"  thee  is  sometimes  thought  of 
as  a  subject,  although  the  older  and  fuller  form  was 
"may  it  fare  thee  well."  It  bears  a  resemblance, 
moreover,  to  "Haste  thee,"  "Stay  thee,"  "Awake 
thee,"  "Hear  thee,"  used  by  Shakespeare  and 
other  writers.  In  such  sentences  thee  was  not  perhaps 


Case  Shijtings  of  Pronouns  275 

originally  thought  of  as  the  subject  of  the  imperative, 
but  as  a  reflexive  object  or  dative. 

There  are  many  cases  in  literature,  however,  \vhrn; 
thee  is  used  for  thou,  as, 

Scotland  and  thee  did  in  each  other  live. — DRYDEN. 
Tis  better  thee  without  than  he  within. — MACBETH. 

The  Quaker  dialect  has  emphasized  this  tendency 
to  make  thee  a  colorless  form  by  such  expressions  as, 
"Did  thee  say  thee  wanted  to  go?" 

When  a  pronoun  is  not  in  close  proximity  to  its 
governing  word  the  case  sense  seems  difficult  to  carry, 
and  writers  have  often  ignored  the  true  relation,  as, 

Let  fortune  go  to  hell  for  it,  not  I. — SHAKESPEARE. 
Let  you  and  I  cry  quits. — THOS.  HUGHES. 

But  such  lapses  as  these  on  the  part  of  writers  are  not 
to  be  justified. 

In  exclamations  the  objective  is  often  used,  as, 
" Dear  me!"  " Oh  me  miserable!"  Yet  in  address  the 
nominative  is  the  usual  form  as,  "Oh  unhappy  thou!" 
'Thou  blessed  One!"  For  an  unattached  pronoun 
(as  in  the  reply  to  questions)  colloquial  idiom  often  u  a 
the  objective,  as,  "Who  goes  there?"  "Me."  This 
may  be  thought  of,  however,  as  an  abbreviation  of  Ihr 
colloquial  "It  is  me." 

But  and  save  have  sometimes  been  followed  by  the 
nominative  as  though  they  were  conjunctions  rathrr 
than  prepositions,  as, 


276  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

None  save  thou  and  thine  I've  sworn 
Shall  be  left  upon  the  morn. — BYRON. 

Away  went  Gilpin,  who  but  he? — COWPEU. 

An  elliptical  expression  following  as  usually  takes  the 
nominative  as  the  obviously  grammatical  form  of  the 
pronoun,  as,  "  Who  is  so  happy  as  I  ?  '  Yet  there  are 
instances  in  literature  where  the  objective  is  used  with 
good  effect,  as, 

The  nations  not  so  blest  as  thee. — THOMSON'S  RULE 
BRITANNIA. 

Yet  oft  in  Holy  Writ  we  see 

Even  such  weak  minister  as  me 

May  the  oppressor  bruise. — SIR  WALTER  SCOTT. 

The  usage  in  the  last  instance  does  not  seem  to  be  a 
happy  one,  and  was  perhaps  adopted  by  the  poet 
chiefly  for  rhyming  purposes.  Yet  the  idea  of  a  half- 
preposition  seems  sometimes  to  reside  in  as,  giving  a 
degree  of  justification  for  the  objective  form. 

Case  shifting  is  especially  common  after  than.  The 
natural  and  approved  case  for  an  abridged  comparative 
clause  would  seem  to  be  the  nominative,  as, 

I  have  known  much  more  highly  instructed  persons  than 
he  make  inferences  quite  as  crude. — GEORGE  ELIOT. 

He  seems  mightier  far  than  thou. — BYRON. 
A  greater  soldier  than  he. — CHAUCER. 

But  literary  usage  is  by  no  means  uniform.  Bishop 
Lowth  in  his  grammar  quotes  many  instances  of  the 
use  of  the  accusative  after  than,  as, 


Case  Shiftings  of  Pronouns  277 

She  fancies  herself  better  than  you  and  me. — THACKERY. 
She  should  be  two  inches  shorter  than  me. — TROLLOPE. 
A  fool's  wrath  is  heavier  than  them  all. — BIBLE. 

On  the  other  hand,  in 

My  soul  hates  nothing  more  than  he. — As  You  LIKE  IT. 

the  elliptical  construction  seems  to  require  that  the 
objective  rather  than  the  nominative  should  have  been 
used. 

The  explanations  given  to  these  varied  case  forms  after 
than  seem  nearly  as  uncertain  as  the  usage  itself. 
Whether  the  feeling  that  prompts  the  variation  rests 
in  a  shifting  character  of  the  case  form  itself  or  in  a 
wavering  sense  of  the  character  of  than  (as  preposition 
or  conjunction)  may  be  doubted.  Yet  in  the  minds  of 
most  persons  of  strong  grammatical  sense  than  is 
usually  a  conjunction  and  the  following  pronoun  would 
take  the  nominative  case  unless  the  objective  is  sub- 
stituted for  reasons  of  euphony.  The  most  anomalous 
of  all  these  case  variations  is  found  perhaps  in  the 
phrase  "than  whom  "found  in  classic  writings,  though 
there  is  no  very  good  syntactical  explanation  of  the 
phrase,  as, 

Beelzebub,  than  whom,  Satan  except,  no  higher  sat. — 
MILTON. 

We  have  already  seen  (See  Chapter  30,  on  Interrog- 
ative Pronouns)  that  there  is  a  tendency  to  make  who  a 
colorless  word  as  to  case,  especially  when  used  inter- 


278  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

rogatively,  and  when  the  governing  word  is  far  removed, 
as, 

Who  should  I  see  in  the  lid  of  it  [a  snuffbox]  but  the  Doc- 
tor?— ADDISON. 

"Who,"  I  exclaimed,  "can  we  consult  but  Miss  P.?"— 
MRS.  HUMPHREY  WARD. 

Perhaps  one  reason  for  the  loss  of  case  in  such  sen- 
tences as,  "  Who  are  you  speaking  of  ?  "  is  that  who 
is  felt  to  be  in  a  sense  the  logical  subject,  as  if  the  sen- 
tence were,  "  Who  is  it  that  you  are  speaking  of  ?  " 

There  are  many  instances  in  literature  where  wlw 
seems  to  be  used  objectively,  as, 

Tell  who  loves  who. — DRYDEN. 


;re  wiio 


I'll  tell  you  who  Time  ambles  withall,  who  Time  trots 
withall,  who  Time  gallops  withall,  and  who  he  stands  still 
withall. — SHAKESPEARE. 

This  ignoring  of  case  form  is  sometimes  extended  to 
the  relative  use  of  who.  Schmidt's  Lexicon  of  Quota- 
tions from  Shakespeare  gives  fifteen  instances  of  the 
interrogative  and  twelve  of  the  relative  use  of  who 
in  objective  relations.  It  is  to  be  noted,  however, 
that  the  eifrly  editions  of  Shakespeare  have  who  in  many 
cases  where  the  later  ones  have  whom.  The  influence 
of  schoolmasters  is  here  shown.  There  are  also  in- 
stances in  literature  where  what  may  be  called  a  super- 
grammatical  sense  has  attracted  whom  into  relations 
where  it  was  not  required,  as, 

Whom  do  men  say  that  I,  the  Son  of  Man,  am? — BIBLE. 


Case  Shiftings  of  Pronouns  279 

While  case  variations  are  very  common  in  literature, 
colloquial  variations  are" carried  much  farther  still. 

Some  of  the  dialects  used  in  England  show  such 
expressions  as,  "Is  that  him?  No.  It's  no  him;  it's 
just  me." 

The  following  couplet  is  said  to  be  taken  from  a 
Hampshire  churchyard: 

"Him  shall  never  come  again  to  we 
But  us  sliall  surely  go  one  day  to  he." 

Cowper  uses  this  colloquialism  with  humorous  effect : 
"You  shall  ride  on  horseback  after  we." 

To  sum  up  this  discussion: — 

The  English  pronouns  still  have  case  forms,  and 
the  use  of  the  wrong  case  form  is  perhaps  one  of  the 
most  conspicuous  faults  in  grammatical  usage  that  can 
he  made.  Yet  in  not  a  few  expressions  (more  or  less 
idiomatic)  usage  differs  widely.  The  pronoun  case 
forms  are  to  some  extent  in  a  state  of  flux.  It  is  the 
part  of  grammarians  to  be  conservative  in  resisting 
rhanges  that  may  be  detrimental  to  the  purity  of  the 
language.  Yet  there  are  limits  beyond  which  it  is 
useless  for  dogmatic  criticism  to  go.  One  should  keep 
one's  eyes  open  to  the  tendencies,  and  seek  to  under- 
stand the  reasons  for  the  variations,  and  then  decide 
in  a  given  case  with  discrimination  as  well  as  con- 
sorvatism,  trying  always  to  preserve  whatever  is  worth 
preserving  in  the  inflectional  forms  that  are  still  left  to 
the  English  tongue. 


LV 

WORDS  OF  PECULIAR  OR  VARIED  USES 

Not  only  does  the  same  word  serve  now  in  one  capacity 
and  now  in  another,  but  also  it  constantly  occurs  that  the 
characteristics  of  different  parts  of  speech  are  manifested 
at  one  time  by  one  word  in  its  ordinary  sense. — DAVENPORT 
AND  EMERSON. 

The  word  it  is  the  greatest  troubler  that  I  know  of  in 
language. — COBBETT. 

The  instrument  ever  adapting  itself  to  the  uses  which  it 
is  to  subserve. — WHITNEY. 

There  are  a  few  words  that  are  so  often  used  in 
peculiar  relations  or  are  capable  of  taking  so  many 
different  uses  that  they  may  well  be  made  the  subject 
of  special  grammatical  examination.  These  are  for 
the  most  part  small  indeclinable  words  of  little  special- 
ized meaning,  and  for  this  reason  capable  of  filling 
grammatical  gaps. 

A  good  exercise  in  grammar  is  to  take  a  certain 
word  and  trace  it  through  all  its  idiomatic  uses,  writing 
sentences  that  will  illustrate  all  the  uses  to  which  tin- 
word  can  be  put. 

One  of  these  words  is  the  neuter  pronoun  it,  some- 
times called  the  indefinite  or  impersonal  pronoun.  A 
comprehensive  study  of  the  word  would  begin  with  its 
earlier  form  hit  and  trace  also  the  gradual  introduction 

280 


Words  of  Peculiar  or  Varied  Uses  281 

of  its  modern  possessive  form  its.  To-day  the  poet 
still  uses  his  where  the  philosopher  says  its.  Some 
(,!'  the  impersonal,  expletive,  and  other  uses  of  it  have 
been  already  noticed.  In  the  games  of  children  it 
has  a  wide-spread  and  peculiar  use  as  a  proper  noun, 
as,  "It  is  now  my  turn  to  be  IT." 

What  is  a  word  of  very  varied  relationship.  Its  uses 
as  pronoun  and  adjective,  both  in  relative  and  interrog- 
ative relations  should  be  illustrated;  also  its  use  as  an 
interjection,  as,  "What!  do  you  really  mean  it?  " 

Other  idiomatic  uses  of  what  may  be  illustrated  as 
follows : 

"He  found  a  miscellaneous  collection  of  shells,  stones, 
chips,  and  what  not." 

"  What  though  the  day  be  lost,  all  is  not  lost/' 
"  In  building  of  chaises  I  tell  you  what," 
"  What  with  this,  what  with  that," 

These  expressions  with  what  are  usually  very  ellip- 
tical, and  it  is  not  always  easy  to  see  what  the  ellipsis  has 
been.  They  may  be  recognized  as  current  idioms 
of  English,  even  when  the  history  of  the  idiom  is  in  a 
degree  lost. 

Similar  treatment  may  be  given  to  as,  which  may 
b<*  cither  conjunction  or  adverb,  or  both  combined,  and 
is  occasionally  used  as  a  relative  pronoun  as,  "Such  as 
I  have  give  I  thee,"  i.  e.:  "Those  which  I  have,"  etc. 

The  correlative  relations  of  as  with  such,  same,  so, 
etc.,  should  be  specially  noticed,  also  the  connection  of 


Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 


as  with  certain  stereotyped  phrases,  as  for  me,  as  yet, 
as  far  as  I  am  able,  etc. 

The  important  verbal  form  be  may  be  either  infinitive, 
subjunctive,  imperative,  or  an  auxiliary  in  a  verbal 
phrase.  As  a  finite  verb  be  is  now  always  subjunctive 
or  imperative,  but  it  formerly  had  an  indicative  use 
also,  as,  "Ye  be  righteous  men."  In  provincial  dia- 
lect we  still  sometimes  hear  this  ancient  indicative 
used  by  rural  citizens  as,  "  Be  you  going  to  plant  pota- 
toes in  that  field  ?  " 

The  verbs  do  and  have  when  used  as  principal  verbs 
have  a  very  definite  and  specialized  meaning,  but  this 
is  almost  wholly  lost  in  their  auxiliary  relations.  Hare 
especially  shows  the  results  of  change  in  its  use  and 
meaning.  Beginning  as  a  principal  verb  with  the  idea 
of  possession  it  loses  this  almost  wholly  when  made  an 
auxiliary  for  the  perfect  tense.  The  idea  given  by 
have  in  these  phrases  is  that  of  completed  state  or 
action,  rather  than  of  possession.  The  original  idea 
of  have  as  possess,  also  included  the  idea  of  to  hold  and 
so  to  esteem,  which  gave  rise  to  the  idiom  had  rather. 
Have  has  gained  also  a  modern  meaning  of  obligation, 
giving  rise  to  such  expressions,  as,  "I  have  to  do  it." 

"Have  at  thee!"  illustrates  another  ancient  idiom 
now  out  of  use. 

As  a  subjunctive  had  frequently  begins  a  sentence,  as, 
"  Had  I  the  power,  I  would  not  use  it." 

Get  as  a  principal  verb  means  to  obtain,  as,  "Get 
wisdom,  get  understanding,"  but  it  is  sometimes  need- 
lessly used  with  have  to  denote  possession,  as,  "  I  have 


Words  of  Peculiar  or  Varied  Uses  283 

got  five  sisters,"  "Have  you  got  anything  to  say?" 
Get  has  acquired  certain  auxiliary  uses  in  colloquial 
idiom  that  take  the  place  of  a  kind  of  passive,  as,  "  To 
get  married,"  "You  must  get  excused."  Many  con- 
ventional idiomatic  phrases  are  also  formed  with  get,  as 
"get  away,"  "get  off,"  "get  up,"  "get  through,"  etc. 

It  is  obviously  impossible  in  one  brief  chapter  to 
name  or  illustrate  all  the  peculiar  uses  of  these  variable 
words.  Some  of  these  have  been  noticed  in  other 
chapters  of  this  book.  Most  of  the  indeclinable  words 
of  the  language  admit  of  varied  uses.  A  few  of  the 
more  prominent  ones  are  here  appended  with  illustra- 
tions of  some  of  their  special  variations  in  relationship. 

All.    All  in  all,  at  all,  all  but  enough,  all  forlorn. 

When  all  is  used  adverbially  with  an  adjective  it  is  often 
connected  by  a  hyphen,  as,  all-holy.  There  is  a  tendency  in 
some  quarters  to  make  a  closer  compound  of  "all  right" 
(i.  e.:  alright),  as  is  done  in  already. 

But.     He  is  but  a  man. 

None  knew  him  but  to  love  him. 

All  but  he  (but  him  ?)  had  fled. 

There  was  not  a  child  but  knew  his  lesson  that 
day. 

Who  knows  but  I  may  go  too  ? 
The.      The  more,  the  merrier. 
Kadi.     Each  other. 
Else.       How  else  can  it  be  done? 

Thou  dcsircst  not  sacrifice,  else  would  I  give  it. 

Any  one  else. 


284  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Little.    It  matters  little. 

Give  me  a  little. 
Like.      Like  produces  like. 

Like  as  a  father  pitieth  his  children,  etc. 

She  sings  like  a  bird. 

The  use  of  like  as  a  conjunction,  as  "he  talks  like  he  was 
crazy,"  is  in  common  colloquial  use  in  certain  regions,  but 
is  not  sustained  by  literary  usage.  Like  was  originally  an 
adjective  or  adverb,  and  followed  by  to  or  unto,  as  "Like 
unto  the  Son  of  Man."  It  has  acquired  the  prepositional 
use  (to  being  now  omitted),  and  there  seems  to  be  no  absolute 
and  inherent  reason  why  it  should  not  acquire  a  conjunctive 
use  as  well.  The  extensive  use  of  like  in  some  sections 
seems  to  show  that  in  many  minds  like  expresses  a  more 
definite  idea  than  is  given  by  as  if.  Yet  like  will  probably 
not  be  adopted  at  present  as  a  conjunction,  either  for  literary 
use  or  in  the  language  of  most  educated  people.  > 

Hard.    Hard  by. 
While.    Worth  while. 

While  away  the  time. 
Over.     Turn  over. 

Over  a  mile. 

Over  against  the  house. 

Ever  and  never.     Ever  so  good.     Never  so  well. 
Save.      Save  where  the  beetle  wheels  his  droning  flight. 
So.         The  fact  is  so.     How  are  you  ?    So-so.     He  is 
so  (colloquial  and  a  provincialism). 

I  care  not,  so  I  be  not  found  wanting. 
Than.    It  is  no  other  than  John. 

Than    whom.       (See    Chapter    54    on    Gise 
Shiftings.) 


Words  of  Peculiar  or  Varied  Uses  285 

The    labor    of    searching    out    and    collecting    Mich 
idiomatic    usages    of    various    important    \\ords,    i>    <,f 
great    value    to   grammar   students,    arousing    inter* 
and     leading    them     into    true    lines   of   grammatical 
thinking. 

Most  of  the  prepositions,  conjunctions,  modal  ad- 
verbs, adjective  pronouns,  and  in  fact  most  of  the 
indeclinable  words  of  English  have  acquired  idiomatic 
usages,  and  may  be  thus  treated. 


LVI 

INTERMEDIATE    GRAMMATICAL     CON- 
STRUCTIONS 

Why,  sir,  it  is  easier  to  tell  what  it  is  not.  We  all  know 
what  Light  is  not,  but  it  is  not  easy  to  tell  what  it  is. — 
BOSWELL'S  LIFE  OF  JOHNSON. 

"There  are  blendings  or  hoverings  of  two  constructions 
in  all  languages." 

"We  should  not  deny  the  reasonableness  of  classification, 
but  insist  on  an  inevitable  indefiniteness  in  the  boundaries 
between  classes — just  as  in  the  prism  no  line  can  be  drawn 
which  separates  one  color  from  another.'1 

In  English  the  logical  connections  between  words  extend 
over  a  wider  area  than  the  purely  grammatical  ones. — SWEET. 

And  if  such  things  are  too  hard  for  children  then  grammar 
is  too  hard,  for  there  neither  is  nor  can  be  any  grammar 
without  them. — R.  JOHNSON'S  GRAMMATICAL  CONVERSA- 
TIONS. 

The  indeterminate  (or  intermediate)  form  of  English  words 
and  phrases,  the  same  form  fulfilling  various  relations,  is 
one  of  the  most  striking  characteristics  in  English. — JOYNES. 

Grammatical  relationships  often  shade  into  one 
another  by  almost  imperceptible  gradations.  There 
are  a  few  well  defined  types  of  construction.  But  there 
is  also  many  a  word  or  phrase  which  lacks  some  marl  s 
of  the  type  with  which  it  is  usually  classed,  or  which  has 
certain  additional  marks  belonging  to  another  type. 

286 


Intermediate  Grammatical  Constructions        287 

The  verb  be  in  its  original  sense  is  an  attributive  verb. 
In  the  sentence,  "God  is,  and  therefore  we  are,"  it  is 
an  absolute  verb  of  existence,  and  the  sentence  contains 
no  other  attribute.  But  in  "I  am  ready,"  it  is  a  pun- 
copula,  and  has  no  attributive  idea.  In  "I  am 
here,"  or  "Where  I  am,  there  shall  my  people  be,"  tlie 
verb  seems  to  have  something  of  its  original  idea  of 
existence  combined  with  a  hovering  sense  of  a  copula- 
tive office  that  is  also  found  in  it.  In  "I  am  here  and 
ready,"  here  and  ready  are  treated  as  co-ordinate 
terms  after  a  copulative  verb. 

It  is  manifest  that  there  is  much  similarity  in  the 
predicate  terms  of, 

Thomas  is  late. 
Thomas  is  behind  time. 
Thomas  is  absent. 
Thomas  is  not  here. 
Thomas  is  in  the  garden. 

If  the  first  of  these  be  an  adjective  it  is  easy  to  find  some 
adjective  character  in  all  the  others. 

But  it  is  equally  true  that  a  close  analogy  exists  in  the 
sentences, 

Thomas  is  in  the  garden. 
Thomas  stands  in  the  garden. 
Thomas  works  in  the  garden. 

and  the  adverbial  element  that  is  evident  in  the  last 

sentence  seems  in  some  degree  to  be  present  in  them  all. 

In   spite   of  their   resemblance,   however,   there   are 

real  differences  in  sentences  like  these,  and  the  study 


£88  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

of  these  minute  differences  with  a  view  to  classification 
is  a  valuable  exercise  in  grammar. 

The  essential  kinship  of  adjectives  with  adverbs 
manifest  in  these  sentences  is  further  shown  by  the  fact 
that  in  poetic  expression  the  adjective  form  usually 
takes  the  place  of  the  adverbial,  as,  "  Sleep  soft,  beloved, 
we  sometimes  say."  It  is  also  illustrated  in  participial 
phrases  expressing  accompanying  action,  as, 

The  boy  walked  on,  throwing  the  ball. 
He  came  running. 

In  an  inflected  language  such  participles  would  agree 
in  case  with  the  subject,  yet  it  requires  little  discern- 
ment to  see  that  the  verb  also  is  to  some  extent  modified. 

In  such  sentences  as,  "He  walks  erect,"  walks  has 
been  called  a  sort  of  half-copula,  the  word  erect  com- 
bining to  some  extent  the  relations  of  both  attribute 
and  adverbial  modifier. 

Here  and  there  and  some  other  adverbs  have  occa- 
sionally a  kind  of  adjective  use,  as,  "the  man  here." 
Yet  we  do  not  say,  "the  here  man." 

Few  elements  of  a  sentence  are  more  distinct  than  the 
direct  object  and  the  adverbial  modifier.  Yet  through 
various  modifications  of  the  indirect  object  the  line  of 
division  seems  sometimes  almost  obliterated. 

Verbs  taking  two  objects  (one  meaning  a  person  and 
the  other  a  thing)  sometimes  sustain  to  each  object 
a  relationship  so  close  that  some  grammarians  (follow- 
ing the  analogy  of  the  Latin  rule  for  two  accusatives) 
would  call  both  of  the  objects  direct.  But,  laying  aside 


Intermediate  Grammatical  Constructions 

all  thought  of  Latin  accusatives  and  datives,  can  anv 
one  see  in  the  purely  logical  relations  of  the  English 

sentence,  any  good  reason  for  finding  two  direct  ol>j« 
in, 

He  taught  me  the  phrase, 

and  at  the  same  time  calling  "  John"  the  indirect  object 
in  the  following? 

He  forgave  John  the  fault. 
He  struck  John  a  blow. 

Can  any  one  find  the  exact  line  of  division  between 
indirect  object  and  adverbial  phrase  among  these 
sentences  ? 

Let  me  find  you  the  place. 

I  will  find  for  you  the  place. 

I  accepted  the  invitation  for  you. 

I  told  him  the  circumstances. 

I  told  him  of  the  circumstances. 

I  carried  him  the  apple. 

I  carried  the  book  to  the  children. 

I  carried  the  book  to  his  room. 

Another  series  of  finely  graded  relationships  may  be 
found  in  the  element  variously  known  as  objective 
predicate  or  attributive  object.  Who  is  able  to  dis- 
tinguish perfectly  between  this  construction  and  that  of 
indirect  object  in  these  sentences? 

They  thought  him  wise. 
They  wished  him  to  be  wise. 
They  wished  him  to  stay. 
They  asked  him  to  stay. 


290  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

They  asked  him  a  question. 

They  asked  of  him  a  favor. 

They  advised  him  to  stay. 

They  advised  him  that  he  should  stay. 

But  how  shall  the  grammarian  deal  with  these  inter- 
mediate constructions?  First,  let  him  ask  himself, 
What  is  the  end  to  be  gained  by  the  classification  of  the 
logical  relations  of  language?  Is  it  that  one  may  be- 
come an  expert  in  "disposing  of"  all  the  words  and 
phrases  of  literature  ?  Then  would  grammar  be  a  use- 
less study  indeed !  Too  much  of  what  is  called  gram- 
matical discussion  is  the  belittling  effort  to  explain  away 
the  intrinsic  beauties  of  language.  There  is  no  small 
harm  in  trying  to  wrest  good  English  to  fit  grammatical 
law.  Who  is  so  learned  that  he  can  claim  to  fully 
interpret  all  the  idioms  of  our  English  tongue  ? 

Syntax  is  based  on  logic,  and  in  almost  every  sentence 
can  be  found  one  or  more  words  bearing  logical  relations 
to  several  others  at  the  same  time.  Inflected  languages 
point  out  by  inflectional  terminations  the  most  promi- 
nent of  these  relations.  In  English,  a  change  in  em- 
phasis or  in  the  position  of  a  single  word  may  bring  into 
prominence  a  new  set  of  logical  relations.  Many  a 
reader  finds  in  a  sentence  elements  of  thought  which  the 
author  of  the  sentence  never  conceived  of.  The  varied 
relations  of  many  English  words  show  something  of  the 
nature  of  the  language  in  this  respect.  In  not  a  few 
cases  more  than  one  of  the  relations  which  a  given  word 
can  hold  will  be  present  in  the  same  phrase  construction . 
The  case  shaftings  of  the  pronouns  also  show  the  blend- 


Intermediate  Grammatical  Conttruetion 

ing  or  hovering  sense  of  two  relations  which  many  a 
Word  can  carry.  If  this  is  found  to  a  considerable 
extent  in  the  pronoun  relations,  it  is  even  more  con- 
spicuous in  the  indeclinable  words  which  are  so  easily 
(hanged  from  one  part  of  speech  to  another  and  which 
form  so  large  a  part  of  the  English  speech. 

The  student  of  English  should  examine  carefully  all 
the  main  types  of  grammatical  relation,  and  then  apply 
the  tests  of  these  types  to  the  elements  of  various  sen- 
tences. But  let  him  not  be  disconcerted  by  the  fact 
that  many  a  word  or  phrase  may  lack  some  of  the  marks 
of  the  standard,  or  may  combine  the  marks  of  several 
distinct  types,  or  may  be  even  capable  of  more  than  one 
sound  interpretation  or  explanation. 

In  the  interpretation  of  these  intermediate  construc- 
tions, grammarians  have  always  differed  and  will  con- 
tinue to  differ.  But  when  a  word  holds  multiplied  re- 
lationships in  a  sentence  it  is  not  a  matter  of  large 
consequence  that  different  minds  give  somewhat  vary- 
ing prominence  to  the  several  relations. 

To  be  many-sided  in  the  study  of  grammar  is  a  very 
different  thing  from  being  superficial.  It  is  this  very 
element  of  gradation  in  grammatical  construction  that 
makes  English  syntax  a  broadening  subject  if  rightly 
pursued.  The  best  result  of  syntactical  study  is  clear- 
ness in  thinking  and  the  power  of  making  logical  dis- 
tinctions. If  this  be  gained,  it  will  act  strongly,  though 
indirectly,  toward  the  increase  of  real  language  power. 


LVH 
THE  "SPLIT  INFINITIVE"* 


The  rule  given  by  grammarians,  "To,  the  sign  of  the  infini- 
tive, should  never  be  separated  from  its  verb,"  should  be 
modified  by  the  clause,"  unless  the  meaning  can  be  more 
clearly  expressed  by  the  insertion  of  the  adverb." — J.  T. 
BAKER,  IN  CORRECT  ENGLISH. 

The  usage  of  the  split  infinitive  has  been  violently  con- 
tested by  rhetoricians,  yet  has  gained  ground.  In  some 
cases  it  has  the  advantage  of  bringing  an  adverb  into  an 
emphatic  position.  In  other  cases  it  is  very  awkward. — 
CARPENTER. 

"The  split  infinitive  is  a  synthetical  combination  now 
establishing  itself." 

Every  day  is  confirming  the  usage.  It  will  stay  because 
it  was  needed,  and  is  unquestionably  a  clear  gain  in  logical 
precision. — JOYNES. 

This  practice,  examples  of  which  go  as  far  back  certainly 
as  the  fifteenth  century,  has  now  become  quite  common. 
In  spite  of  the  opposition  it  encounters  there  is  little  ques- 
tion that  it  will  establish  itself  permanently  in  the  language. 
— LOUNSBURY. 

The  insertion  of  a  modifying  word  between  the  sign 
to  and  the  infinitive  has  been  greatly  censured  by  grarn- 

*The  "split  infinitive"  so-called,  is  comprehensively 
treated  in  an  article  by  Professor  Lounsbury,  of  Yale  Uni- 
versity, entitled  "To  and  the  Infinitive,"  and  published  in 
Harper's  Magazine  of  April,  1904. 

292 


The  "Split  Infinitive'9  293 

marians,  on  the  ground  that  we  must  not  divide  a  part 
of  speech. 

But  the  history  of  the  infinitive  shows  that  to  is  in  no 
sense  an  integral  part  of  the  infinitive.  It  was  never 
used  originally  with  the  ordinary  infinitive,  but  only 
with  its  dative  (sometimes  called  its  gerundial)  form. 
The  extension  of  the  sign  to  to  the  common  infinitive 
during  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries  was  itself  at 
that  time  a  language  corruption.  Many  infinitive  forms 
(as  in  verb  phrases)  are  still  used  without  the  sign  to. 

Yet  even  if  to  were  essential  to  the  construction,  the 
reason  is  by  no  means  obvious  why  the  verbal  noun 
should  be  debarred  from  having  a  closely-joined  modi- 
fier any  more  than  any  other  noun  that  follows  the  pre- 
position to,  as  in  the  phrases  "to  this  end,"  "to  my 
father." 

But  a  question  of  propriety  is  finally  one  of  good 
usage.  More  than  twenty  years  ago  Dr.  Fitzedward 
Hall  showed  conclusively  that  this  separation  of  the 
infinitive  from  its  sign  has  occasionally  been  made  by 
good  writers  in  all  periods  since  about  the  fourteenth 
century.  Beginning  with  Wycliffe  who  wrote  "to  never 
have  received"  and  "to  evermore  trow,"  he  gives  ex- 
amples of  this  use  from  a  host  of  writers  including 
Pecock,  Sir  John  Fortescue,  Tyndale,  Sir  Thomas 
Browne,  Bentley,  De  Foe,  Dr.  Johnson,  Burke,  Sou  they, 
Coleridge,  Lamb,  De  Quincy,  Matthew  Arnold,  Charles 
Reade,  Ruskin,  Herbert  Spencer,  and  Leslie  Stephen. 

To  Dr.  Hall's  list  could  be  added  examples  from  Frank- 
lin, Byron,  Keats,  the  Brownings,  Lowell,  Holmes,  and 


'294  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

many  other  prominent  English  and  American  writers. 

Yet  it  must  be  conceded  that  in  spite  of  this  imposing 
array  of  names,  the  general  practice  of  good  writers 
until  recently  has  been  against  this  separation.  For 
some  of  the  writers  quoted  (as  Dr.  Johnson)  a  single 
example  of  its  use  is  all  that  could  probably  be  given. 
With  others  the  use  seems  to  been  have  confined  to 
certain  stereotyped  phrases,  as,  "Ta  far  exceed"  used 
by  Burke.  Although  Browning  and  some  others  used 
such  forms  freely,  Tennyson  certainly  abstained  and 
perhaps  never  used  one. 

Grammarians  also  have  always  been  on  the  opposing 
side.  Goold  Brown  indeed  tells  us  that  the  right  to 
place  an  adverb  between  the  sign  to  and  the  infinitive 
must  be  conceded  to  poets,  and  quotes  from  Burns's 
poem,  "The  Cotter's  Saturday  Night,"  the  line, 

"Who  dared  to  nobly  stem  tyrannic  pride,  " 

where  the  meter  of  the  verse  may  be  thought  to  have 
imposed  its  form  upon  the  construction. 

But  usage  which  can  lay  restrictions  upon  language 
can  also  remove  those  restrictions.  Within  the  last 
fifty  years  there  has  been  a  growing  feeling  that  it  is  to 
the  advantage  of  the  language  that  the  separation  should 
sometimes  be  made. 

Thus  Macaulay  wrote  in  1840,  "In  order  fully  to 
appreciate  the  character  of  Lord  Holland  it  is  necessary 
to  go  back  into  the  history  of  his  family."  But  in  1843 
he  brought  out  an  edition  of  his  essays  carefully  revised 
in  which  the  phrase  reads,  "  In  order  to  fully  appreciate 


The  "Split  Infinitive"  295 

the  character,"  etc.  Macaulay  was  never  careless  in 
his  modes  of  expression,  and  the  change  evidently 
shows  his  mature  thought  on  this  subject. 

The  influence  of  modern  journalism  with  its  in- 
sistence on  conciseness  has  been  strongly  in  favor  of 
this  practice,  as  making  often  a  much  more  compact 
phrase,  or  giving  truer  emphasis  to  the  important  idea, 
as  in, 

To  almost  succeed  is  not  enough. 

Indeed  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  a  substitute  for  the 
divided  infinitive  in  such  a  phrase  as,  "to  more  than 
counterbalance."  There  are  certain  conventional 
phrases,  however,  as  "  never-to-be  forgotten,"  in  which 
the  adverb  is  never  inserted  within  the  phrase. 

Some  careful  writers  of  to-day,  who  have  been 
trained  in  the  older  school  of  literature,  seldom  use 
a  "split  infinitive,"  or  do  so  with  hesitation  only  when 
there  is  clearly  a  gain  in  meaning  or  in  energy.  But 
probably  the  words  of  Professor  Lounsbury  are  justifi- 
able, when  he  says: 

"  It  is  clear  that  most  of  those  who  now  refrain  from 
the  practice  under  discussion  no  longer  do  so  instinct- 
ively as  was  once  the  case,  but  rather  under  compulsion. 
They  refrain,  not  because  they  feel  that  it  is  unnatural 
or  unidiomatic  but  because  they  have  been  told  that  it 
is  improper.  Artificial  bulwarks  of  this  sort  will  never 
hold  back  long  a  general  movement  of  speech.  .  .  . 
The  time,  indeed,  will  come  when  men  will  be  unaware 
that  there  has  ever  been  any  dispute  about  the  matter 
at  all." 


Lvm 

DISPUTED  POINTS  IN  GRAMMAR 

Grammar  appeals  to  reason  as  well  as  to  authority,  but 
to  what  extent  it  should  do  so  has  been  matter  of  dispute. — 
GOOLD  BROWN. 

"The  same  fact  thought  of  in  different  ways  may  make 
perplexing  differences  in  construction." 

A  fallacy, — that  of  two  ways  of  expression  one  must  be 
wrong. — DEAN  ALFORD. 

And  for  there  is  so  great  diversitie 

In  English  and  in  writing  of  our  tong 

So  pray  I  to  God  that  none  miswrite  thee. 

— CHAUCER. 
"Baith  did  fight, 
And  baith  did  win, 
And  baith  did  rin  awa'." 

In  the  multiplicity  of  subjects  that  invite  the  world's 
attention  questions  of  grammatical  propriety  sometimes 
seem  of  minor  importance.  Many  minds  absorbed 
in  other  interests  are  content  to  believe  that  their  own 
language  does  not  differ  greatly  from  that  of  the  per- 
sons around  them,  and  are  willing  to  let  alone  the  finer 
and  more  subtle  questions  of  linguistic  usage. 

Yet  there  is  an  increasing  number  of  persons — edu- 
cators, literary  men,  and  other  cultivated  minds — 
who  prefer  to  be  among  those  who  mould  language  and 
decide  in  regard  to  its  finer  distinctions,  rather  than  with 

296 


Disputed  Points  in  Grammar  297 

those  who  follow  blindly  rules  that  have  been  laid  down 
for  them  by  others.  The  vigorous  discussion  that 
arose  over  the  number  form  of  the  verb,  after  the  pub- 
lication of  Kipling's  line, 

"The  shouting  and  the  tumult  dies," 

gave  evidence  that  questions  of  grammatical  propriety 
are  of  real  interest  to  the  modern  world. 

Some  of  the  questions  that  receive  discussion  among 
grammarians  themselves  deal  with  the  grammatical 
relationships  of  words  or  phrases,  and  with  the  logical 
interpretation  of  accepted  idioms.  These  are  of  in- 
terest to  scholars,  and  the  determining  of  these  fur- 
nishes tests  of  construction  that  can  be  applied  in  de- 
ciding the  correctness  or  incorrectness  of  other  expres- 
sions of  more  doubtful  propriety.  Yet  in  these  purely 
logical  and  scientific  questions  the  general  public  is  not 
greatly  interested. 

But  in  questions  of  practical  usage  all  intelligent 
minds  have  a  personal  interest.  Among  the  expres- 
sions which  one  hears  there  are  not  a  few  that  are  mani- 
festly wrong,  and  require  no  discussion.  There  are 
provincialisms,  solecisms,  and  vulgarisms,  that  must 
be  condemned,  but  that  scarcely  need  to  be  argued 
about. 

Among  the  grosser  ones  may  be  named  impure 
contractions,  as,  don't  with  a  subject  of  the  third  person 
singular  (He  don't),  and  the  bastard  form  ain't  (I 
ain't);  them  used  as  an  adjective  (them  apples),  those 
limiting  kind  or  sort  (those  sort  of  people) ;  real  as  an 


298  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

adverb  (It  is  real  prclly)  and  the  interchange  of  tho 
principal  parts  of  strong  verbs  (He  done  it.)  More 
subtle  are  the  errors  of  "dangling  participles,"  unre- 
lated clauses,  and  the  mistakes  in  arrangement  and 
agreement  that  come  from  confusions  of  thought.  A 
general  knowledge  of  grammar  ought  usually  to  be  a 
sufficient  defense  against  such  impurities  as  these. 

The  questions  of  most  interest  relate  to  the  tolera- 
tion or  deliberate  adoption  of  certain  alleged  improprie- 
ties under  special  conditions  that  seem  to  invite  their  use. 
For  instance,  the  usual  position  of  the  word  only  is 
just  before  the  word  which  it  modifies,  yet  there  are 
occasions  when  smoothness  of  style  is  gained  by  placing 
it  in  some  other  position,  as,  "  I  will  only  mention  some 
of  the  best."  In  spite  of  the  protests  of  rigid  gram- 
marians, the  use  of  either  in  offering  a  choice  among 
more  than  two  objects  seems  to  be  increasing,  and  is 
supported  in  a  measure  by  some  of  the  modern  dic- 
tionaries. There  is  also  some  good  reason  for  this 
allowance,  as  any  implies  plurality  and  is  less  definitive, 
while  any  one  seems  needlessly  labored  and  formal. 

The  comparative  form  is  sometimes  accorded  to  an 
adjective  of  absolute  meaning,  as,  "more  universal," 
"less  complete."  Again,  where  the  stickler  for  exael- 
s  would  say  "Come  to  see  me,"  the  use  of  and  (as, 
Come  and  see  me)  is  often  tolerated  and  is  illustrated 
in  the  Scripture  words  of  Jesus,  "Come  and  see." 
"And  they  came  and  saw  where  he  dwelt."  And  yet 
again,  some  would  prefer  the  softened  and  less  egoistic 
expression,  "I  do  not  think  so,"  where  others  may 


Disputed  Points  in  Grammar  299 

insist  that  the  precise  thought  to  be  expressed  is,  "  I 
think  it  is  not  so." 

Shall  we  say  " the  three  first"  or  "the  first  three" ? 

Are  the  relative  pronouns  that,  and  who  or  which, 
to  he  sharply  differentiated  ?  The  reciprocal  pronoun 
phrases,  each  other  and  one  another?  The  interjections 
O  and  oh?  May  we  use  whose  as  the  possessive  of 
which?  And  may  we  use  the  possessive  case  when 
possession  is  not  indicated,  as,  "the  waves'  roar?" 

Has  the  interrogative  who  become  indeterminate  in 
case  form? 

Shall  me  be  used  attributively  (It  is  me)  ? 

Has  the  subjunctive  had  its  day  ? 

Has  the  "split  infinitive"  established  its  claim  to 
recognition  ? 

How  far  may  the  general  sense  of  a  passage,  rather 
than  the  strict  number  form  of  a  subject  or  an  antece- 
dent, determine  the  forms  of  agreement  for  verbs  and 
pronouns  ? 

All  these  and  many  other  questions  receive  unlike 
answers  at  the  hands  of  different  speakers  and  writers 
and  grammarians. 

The  question  of  correctness  in  speech  and  writing  is 
largely  '>"<'  <>i'  usa^e;  but  it  is  also  one  of  good  MB 
The  final  arbiter  in  the4  decision  for  the  man  of  educa- 
tion will  be  his  own  practical  and  cultivated  judgment, 
which  tries  to  weigh  carefully  all  the  facts  and  prin- 
ciples of  historic  n.nd  comparative  grammar  as  well  as 
those  of  actual  and  widespread  contemporaneous 
usage,  and  then  chooses  from  among  the  available 


300  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

forms  of  expression  the  one  that  gives  with  the  greatest 
force  and  smoothness  and  the  fewest  objections  the 
clearest  utterance  of  his  own  inner  thought.  One 
should  be  conservative  in  this  judgment,  however,  and 
not  let  down  the  bars  to  impurities  of  speech  except 
for  good  and  sufficient  reasons. 


LIX 

CHANGES  IN  THE  GRAMMAR  OF  ENGLISH* 

English  is  not  a  dead  language.  It  grows  from  roots  in 
the  lower  soil. — N.  Y.  Independent. 

"A  dead  language  neither  gains  nor  loses.  English  still 
has  the  vital  sap  flowing." 

The  process  of  dropping  inflections  seems  nearly  to  have 
reached  its  limit,  yet  there  are  two  forms  of  the  verb  which 
we  may  even  now  see  undergoing  the  process  of  reduction. 

— SOUTHWORTH. 

Every  falling  away  of  inflection  is  followed  by  some  new 
synthetical  formation,  as  the  loss  of  mood  ending  brought 
in  the  auxiliaries. — KELLNER. 

The  evolution  of  language  shows  a  progressive  tendency 
from  inseparable  irregular  conglomerations  to  freely  and 
regularly  combinable  short  elements. — JESPEHSEN. 

The  English  language  is /developing  daily  according  to  its 
needs.  It  is  casting  asid^  words  and  usages  that  are  no 
longer  satisfactory;  it  is  adding  new  terms  as  new  things 
are  brought  forward,  and  it  is  making  new  usages  as  con- 
venience suggests,  to  the  neglect  of  the  five-barred  gates 
rigidly  set  up  by  our  ancestors.-VBRANDER  MATTHEWS. 

These  changes  are  the  result  of  natural  tendencies  of  the 
organs  of  speech  and  of  the  human  mind,  and  are  therefore 
to  a  great  extent  uniform  in  their  operation. — SWEET. 

*Some  of  the  points  mentioned  in  this  and  in  the  following 
chapter  are  referred  to  also  in  the  preceding  chapters  under 
the  appropriate  heads.  It  seemed  desirable,  however,  that 
there  should  be  a  brief  summary  of  these  important  facts. 

301 


302  Grammar  and  Its  Itcasons 

The  vicissitudes  of  language  are  a  thing  over  which  our 
volitions  rarely  have  a  calculable  control. — FITZEDWARD 
HALL. 

It  may  not  be  possible  to  stem  the  tide,  but  certainly  the 
efforts  of  teachers  and  text-books  should  be  directed  towards 
keeping  the  language  free  from  conflicting  and  weakening 
forms  of  speech. — SOUTHWORTH. 

The  great  innovator  Time  manages  his  innovations  so 
dexterously,  spreads  them  over  such  vast  periods,  and  so 
gradually,  that  often  while  effecting  the  highest  changes  he 
seems  to  be  effecting  none  at  all. — TRENCH. 

The  fluidity  of  the  English  language  is  a  fluidity  not  like 
that  of  a  river,  but  rather  like  that  of  a  glacier,  the  move- 
ment of  which  is  noted  by  years  or  generations  rather  than 
by  days. — N.  Y.  Independent. 

The  universal  law  of  change  and  progression  applies 
to  all  forms  of  knowledge,  and  grammar  is  no  exception. 
At  first  thought  this  may  not  seem  to  be  the  case.  The 
tendency  and  effort  of  grammar  is  to  fix  the  condition 
of  the  language  by  forbidding  irregularities  that  pro- 
duce confusion.  Thus  the  formulas  of  grammarians 
and  the  language  of  literature  are  much  the  same 
wherever  English  is  spoken.  It  is  the  colloquial  ex- 
pressions of  uneducated  people  that  show  the  most 
tendency  to  fluctuation. 

Yet  there  are  real  changes  in  the  facts  of  language 
with  which  grammar  deals.  They  are  slow  in  their 
operation  and  it  requires  careful  study  and  the  com- 
parison of  the  literature  of  different  ages  to  trace  their 
order  of  progression. 


Changes  in  the  Grammar  of  English         303 

All  the  language  changes  are  the  result  of  natural 
tendencies  in  the  human  mind,  and  of  social  develop- 
ment. The  speakers  and  writers  of  the  language  do 
not  decree  such  changes.  They  can  to  some  extent 
modify  and  retard  tendencies  that  they  think  are  harm- 
ful to  the  language.  In  fact  if  they  did  not  to  some 
extent  control  these  changes  the  language  of  two  suc- 
cessive generations  would  become  mutually  unintelli- 
gible. But  the  laws  that  lead  to  change  are  never 
inactive.  Ours  is  a  living  and  growing  language  and 
this  fact  must  be  recognized  in  all  forms  of  language 
study. 

Most  of  the  changes  in  language  come  in  the  field  of 
diction,  and  are  therefore  etymological  rather  than 
grammatical.  Yet  some  of  these  word  changes  have  a 
grammatical  bearing  as  well.  A  large  increase  in 
vocabulary  comes  by  converting  one  part  of  speech 
into  another.  With  extraordinary  license  English 
takes  words  of  all  classes  and  uses  them  as  nouns. 
Thus  we  speak  of  a  "walk"  through  the  fields,  the 
"up  and  down"  of  a  piece  of  cloth,  the  "whys"  and 
"wherefores"  of  an  argument.  With  nearly  equal 
freedom  nouns  become  adjectives  and  both  of  these 
classes  become  verbs.  We  speak  of  a  "university" 
man,  a  "provision"  store;  we  "black"  our  boots,  and 
"idle"  away  our  time.  A  girl  "queens"  it  among  her 
companions,  and  the  poet  reminds  us  that  "a  man 
may  gentle  his  condition." 

When  a  word  in  its  passage  from  one  part  of  SJK 
into  another  carries  with  it  th^^miting  terms  of  its 


304  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

original  state,  a  new  grammatical  relation  is  acquired. 
In  the  expression  "a  run  on  the  beach"  the  preposi- 
tional phrase  "on  the  beach"  has  been  changed  from 
an^adverbial  to  an  adjective  character,  by  the  new 
noun  meaning  given  to  run.  The  key  to  not  a  few 
grammatical  puzzles  can  be  found  in  the  simple  fact 
that  the  word  at  the  basis  of  the  peculiar  phrase  \vas 
originally  of  another  part  of  speech  and  has  carried 
its  belongings  with  it  into  the  new  associations. 

A  careful  study  of  the  prefixes  and  suffixes  used  in 
making  one  part  of  speech  from  another  throws  much 
light  on  the  relations  of  the  parts  of  speech  among 
themselves.  Thus  we  add  ness  to  an  adjective  to  make 
an  abstract  noun,  as  greenness,  goodness.  Ly  added 
to  an  adjective  gives  a  strictly  adverbial  Word,  as, 
slowly,  firmly.  Er  or  or  with  a  verb  makes  a  noun,  as, 
actor,  singer.  There  are  many  such  semi-grammatical 
laws  that  govern  word  formations. 

Changes  in  inflection  come  far  more  slowly  than 
those  of  diction,  and  are  usually  subtractions  from  the 
language  rather  than  additions  to  it.  The  study  of 
comparative  grammar  shows  that  the  languages  of 
Europe  have  tended  toward  an  analytical  character, 
away  from  the  synthetic  or  highly-inflected  types  that 
belonged  to  Sanskrit,  Greek  and  Latin.  Mod<  rn 
languages  tend  to  break  away  from  inflected  forms, 
and  to  make  large  use  of  short  indeclinable  Words 
that  can  be  separated  from  each  other  and  recombincd 
into  new  phrases  at  pleasure.  All  the  languages  of 
southern  Europe  hMtehown  this  tendency,  but  English 


Changes  in  the  Grammar  of  English         305 

has  gone  farther  in  this  direction  than  any  other  Euro- 
pean tongue. 

In  such  a  process  prepositions  usually  come  in  first, 
and  are  brought  to  the  aid  of  the  inflectional  form. 
Later  the  inflection  itself  seems  needless,  and  the  \vnght 
of  the  relation  seems  to  fall  on  the  preposition.  Tlie 
inflection  may  then  live  on,  as  an  ancient  fashion,  or 
under  changing  social  conditions  there  may  be  a 
shedding  of  inflections  which  are  not  really  needed  to 
show  the  logical  relations. 

Such  a  history  belongs  to  the  Saxon  tongue.  For  a 
time  it  had  both  the  inflections  and  the  prepositions; 
then  with  the  general  shake-up  that  came  to  the  lan- 
guage after  the  Norman  Conquest,  the  inflections  were 
largely  cast  off  as  a  burden  that  could  be  dispensed 
with. 

With  this  loss  of  inflections  came  other  changes 
as  well.  The  order  of  words  in  the  sentence  became 
more  rigid.  Old  English  with  its  large  elements  of 
agreeing  forms  was  naturally  careless  of  word  order. 
There  was  little  danger  of  related  words  getting  de- 
tached in  thought  since  the  forms  showed  the  logical 
connections.  Some  grammarians  have  maintained 
that  it  was  the  strengthening  of  word  order  first  that 
made  the  inflections  unnecessary  so  that  they  fell  away. 
But  it  is  needless  to  affirm  too  definitely  as  to  the  re- 
lations of  cause  and  effect  here.  The  loss  of  inflections 
and  the  strengthening  of  word  order  went  on  sim- 
ultaneously, each  process  aiding  and  hastening  the 
other. 


306  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

The  loss  of  the  inflectional  form  gave  a  new  syntacti- 
cal freedom  to  words,  making  it  possible  not  only  that 
they  should  be  transferred  easily  from  one  part  of 
speech  to  another,  but  especially  that  they  should  be 
able  to  hold  several  relations  at  the  same  time.  Tlio 
intermediate  constructions  in  English — the  same  word 
fulfilling  several  functions — is  one  of  the  most  marked 
results  of  this  falling  off  of  inflectional  agreements. 

Although  in  general  the  loss  of  inflections  comes  to  a 
language  very  gradually,  there  is  in  the  history  of 
English  one  apparent  exception  to  this  principle  of 
slow  change,  owing  to  a  peculiar  epoch  in  English 
history  in  which  two  peoples  became  united  into  one. 
During  about  two  hundred  years,  while  the  Saxons 
and  Normans  were  becoming  amalgamated,  the  process 
went  on  with  comparative  rapidity,  and  at  the  end  of 
that  period  there  was  a  new  language.  At  least  the 
English  tongue  had  undergone  such  large  modifications 
as  to  make  the  literature  of  the  periods  before  and  after 
this  epoch  distinct  in  language  characteristics.  Yet 
the  grammar  of  modern  English  is,  nevertheless, 
deeply  rooted  in  the  grammar  of  the  old  Saxon  tongue. 

But  there  were  various  nations  in  the  old  Saxon 

(  heptarchy.     Their  languages,  or  dialects,  had  differing 

1  grammatical  forms,  and  our  remaining  old   English 

/  inflections  have  come  to  us  from  various  sections  of 

Britain.     Yet  the  legacies  are  not  equally  from  all  the 

dialects.     The  gieat  writers  of  the  fourteenth  century, 

.Robert  of  Brunne,  Wycliffe,  Gower  and  Chaucer,  used 

the  dialect  of  the  east  Midland.     Their  popularity  uncj 


Changes  in  the  Grammar  of  English          307 

the  wide  circulation  of  their  writings  made  this  dialect 
the  literary  language  of  England. 

The  northern  dialect  continued  to  be  used,  but  had 
little  or  no  literature.  At  last  it  seemed  strange  to  the 
English  people  and  they  refused  to  call  it  English  but 
called  it  Scotch.  It  was  the  language  of  Burns  and 
of  Scott,  and  is  to-day  more  like  old  English  than 
English  itself. 

Old  English,  in  the  form  in  which  it  has  been  pre- 
served, was  a  highly  inflected  language.  It  had  six 
cases  of  nouns,  nominative,  genitive,  dative,  accusative, 
vocative,  and  a  case  similar  to  the  ablative  which  has 
been  called  the  instrumental  case.  The  noun 
plurals  were  formed  on  various  patterns,  of  which  a 
few  examples  have  come  down  to  us  in  such  words  as, 
oxen,  mice.  We  call  them  irregular  plurals  but  they 
are  remnants  of  old  regular  declensions. 

Adjectives  and  participles  had  case  agreements  with 
the  nouns.  Verbs  were  of  various  conjugations,  and 
the  remnants  of  all  these  conjugations  except  one 
(the  one  making  its  past  tense  in  ed)  wre  now  group 
together  as  one  conjugation  of  strong  verbs.  The 
one  in  ed  we  have  retained  as  the  rule  of  the  language 
and  call  it  the  new,  or  weak,  or  regular  conjugation. 

AVith  the  coming  of  AYilliam  the  Conqueror  a  new 
set  of  language  forces  was  introduced.  The  early 
pages  of  Ivanhoe  have  an  interesting  scene  between 
AYamba  and  the  Swineherd,  showing  the  relations 
\\liicli  the  Norman  and  Saxon  languages  naturally 
assumed  in  the  range  of  vocabulary — the  animals, 


308  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

swine  and  ox,  retaining  their  Saxon  names  while  under 
the  Swineherd,  but  becoming  pork  and  beef  when  re- 
duced to  articles  of  commerce  and  served  in  the  dining- 
hall  of  a  Norman  castle. 

But  with  the  grammatical  character  of  the  language 
the  results  were  different.  The  Normans  did  not  know 
the  Saxon  inflections  and  dropped  them  whenever  they 
could  make  logical  connections  without  them.  As  a 
result  English  is  a  virtually  uninflected  language  but 
retains  various  shreds  of  the  old  forms  and  agreements. 

For  a  century  or  two  after  the  Conquest,  there  was  a 
period  of  broken  Saxon,  known  as  early  English,  the 
Norman  language  also  being  used  by  some.  During 
the  period  1350-1550  English  became  moulded  into 
the  national  language,  gradually  acquiring  most  of  its 
present  characteristics.  Since  that  time  it  is  essen- 
tially modern  English. 

In  the  early  years  after  the  Conquest  many  Norman 
words  found  their  way  into  common  use.  During  the 
fifteenth  century  Latin  was  used  extensively  by 
learned  men.  The  fashion  became  so  extravagant 
that  it  was  at  last  made  the  occasion  of  satire.  Men 
laughed  at  "ink-horn  words." 

Butler  (in  Hudibras)  thus  describes  this  style  of 
foreign  English: 


"A  Babylonish  dialect 
Which  learned  pedants  much  affect, 
'Twas  English  cut  on  Greek  and  Latin 
Like  fiction  heretofore  on  Satin." 

But  under  the  influence  of  Classical  study  many 


Changes  in  the  Grammar  of  English         309 

words  derived  from  Greek  and  Latin  roots  found 
their  way  into  English.  Modern  science  also  draws 
its  nomenclature  largely  from  these  sources,  so  that  new 
words  of  classical  origin  are  continually  coming  into 
English. 

But  while  the  more  significant  words  of  the  English 
vocabulary,  nouns,  adjectives,  and  verbs,  have  come 
in  immense  numbers  from  Norman  French,  Greek  and 
Latin,  all  or  nearly  all  the  connecting  and  filling-in 
parts  of  speech, — the  prepositions,  conjunctions,  modal 
adverbs,  articles,  adjective  pronouns,  personal  pro- 
nouns, and  auxiliaries,  are  Saxon  in  origin.  And  since 
the  inflections  that  have  been  retained  are  also  Saxon, 
it  may  be  said  that  while  English  is  much  mixed  in 
vocabulary,  its  grammar  is  purely  Saxon. 

The  invention  of  printing  in  the  fifteenth  century 
gave  fixity  to  the  forms  then  in  use.  But  perhaps  no 
single  influence  in  this  direction  has  been  stronger 
than  that  of  the  English  Bible.  Wycliffe's  and  Tyndale's 
Bibles,  especially  the  latter,  did  something  in  this  direc- 
tion. But  after  King  James's  version,  published  in 
1611,  became  the  "Authorized  Version,"  and  the  rise 
and  spread  of  Puritanism  gave  tremendous  influence 
to  this  book  throughout  the  kingdom,  the  expressions 
used  in  the  Bible  became  familiar  and  entered  into  the 
language  of  all.  A  similar  influence  has  been  exerted 
upon  the  German  language  by  Luther's  Bible. 

Although  the  dropping  of  inflections  nearly  reached 
its  limit  several  centuries  ago  the  language  has  not  been 
stationary  since  then.  Looking  over  the  four  hundred 


310  Grammar  and  Its  Reason* 

years  of  the  modern  English  period,  we  find  not  a 
few  grammatical  changes  in  all  the  parts  of  speech, 
and  the  tendencies  to  change  are  still  active.  During 
this  long  period  nouns  have  established  their  modern 
possessive  form,  have  reduced  greatly  the  number  of 
their  irregular  plurals,  and  their  feminine  forms.  The 
old  noun  compounds,  including  such  gender  forms  as 
manchild,  he-goat,  have  mostly  gone  out  of  use. 

The  pronouns  ihou  and  ye  have  been  relegated  to 
archaic  or  poetic  uses,  its  has  found  its  way  into  the 
language,  his  and  her  have  restricted  their  gender 
significations,  mine  and  thine  have  become  absolute 
pronoun  forms,  and  certain  old  relative  and  interrog- 
ative pronouns,  as  whosoever,  whatso,  whether,  have 
dropped  out  of  general  use. 

Adjectives  are  more  strict  in  their  modes  of  com- 
parison, and  they  no  longer  double  their  comparative 
and  superlative  forms. 

Among  verbs,  some  strong  verbs  and  many  strong 
forms  of  verbs  have  gone  out  of  use,  subjunctive  forms 
have  become  few,  auxiliary  verbs  have  enlarged  their 
functions,  shall  and  will  phrases  have  been  modified, 
and  many  new  verbal  phrases  have  grown  into  favor. 

Many  adverbs,  prepositions  and  conjunctions  have 
enlarged  their  sentence  functions,  and  special  words 
among  them  have  defined  more  precisely  their  meaning 
and  usages. 

Certain  constructions,  as  impersonal  sentences  and 
absolute  participial  phrases,  are  more  rare  than  formerly 
and  the  dative  (or  accusative)  case  used  by  Milton  as 


Changes  in  the  Grammar  of  English         311 

the  absolute  case  has  given  way  to  the  nominative. 

A  comparison  of  modern  English  with  the  language 
of  King  James's  version  of  the  Bible  published  in  1611 
is  one  of  the  best  ways  of  discovering  how  far  English 
grammar  has  changed  in  the  last  three  hundred  years. 
Shakespeare's  works  offer  a  similar  opportunity  for 
profitable  comparison,  and  Abbott's  Shakesperian 
Grammar  gives  convenient  and  scholarly  assistance 
in  this  work. 

The  most  conspicuous  difference  which  the  Bible 
of  1611  shows  from  the  English  of  to-day  is  in  the  con- 
stant use  of  thou  and  ye,  and  the  verbal  forms  in  est 
and  eth,  which  give  to  the  writing  that  peculiar  structure 
which  we  call  solemn  or  ancient  style. 

The  extensive  use  of  subjunctives  (If  he  find  it, 
Though  he  slay  me)  and  of  the  "shall  of  prophecy,"  the 
absence  of  many  of  our  modern  verb  phrases,  the  oc- 
casional use  of  obsolete  verbs  (wist,  wot,  wit,  trow,  etc.), 
or  of  archaic  verbal  forms  (holpen,  spat),  or  of  verbs 
with  an  obsolete  meaning  (let,  prevent),  the  use  of  be 
as  an  indicative  (Ye  be  spies),  of  did  as  an  auxiliary 
for  the  ordinary  past  tense  (I  did  eat),  the  lack  of  an 
auxiliary  in  negative  and  interrogative  sentences 
(Lacked  ye  anything?),  the  use  of  for  before  the  in- 
finitive (for  to  see);  all  these  things  and  many  more 
show  the  decided  changes  that  English  grammar  has 
been  making  especially  in  its  verb  forms. 

The  use  of  his  and  her  without  sex  signification 
(Every  tree  is  known  by  his  fruit),  the  use  of  which 
where  the  modern  word  would  be  who  (Our  Father 


312  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

which  art  in  Heaven),  the  use  of  impersonal  sentences 
(It  sufficeth  me),  of  expletive  objects  (Saddle  me  the 
ass),  of  the  intransitive  phrase  with  be  rather  than 
have  (I  am  come  that  they  might  have  life),  the  use  of 
to  after  like  (like  to  a  sardine  stone);  all  these  testify 
to  the  movements  that  have  been  taking  place  in  Eng- 
lish grammar  since  1611. 

In  sentences  as  a  whole  time  brings  changes.  It  is 
the  custom  of  the  modern  age  to  make  shorter  sentences 
than  of  old,  to  have  fewer  long  participial  and  infinitive 
constructions.  It  has  been  estimated  that  Edmund 
Spenser's  average  sentence  was  forty-nine  words, 
Macaulay's  twenty-three,  Emerson's  twenty.  As  the 
style  of  thought  changes,  the  "genius  of  the  language" 
modifies  its  constructions  to  suit  the  new  mental  mood. 

Within  the  memory  of  living  people  some  gram- 
matical changes  in  English  may  be  perceived.  The 
subjunctive  mood,  the  forms  of  strong  verbs,  the  gender 
forms  of  nouns  are  not  quite  what  they  were  a  genera- 
tion ago.  The  "split  infinitive"  has  become  more 
common  and  finds  defenders  among  present-day  gram- 
marians, and  various  idiomatic  usages  have  been  gain- 
ing or  losing  in  public  favor. 

The  question  of  the  proper  attitude  of  grammarians 
and  of  educated  people  in  general  toward  these  language 
changes  is  an  important  one.  There  is  a  sense  in 
which  a  language  should  be  encouraged  to  follow  its 
own  bent,  and  to  adapt  itself  to  the  changing  needs  of 
the  people  who  use  it.  Yet  if  there  is  no  restraining 
tendency  the  generations  will  not  keep  in  touch  with 


Changes  in  the  Grammar  of  English         313 

one  another.  People  of  different  countries  who  orig- 
inally spoke  the  same  language  will  find  their  speech 
mutually  unintelligible  and  the  language  will  break  up 
into  dialects.  This  has  sometimes  been  the  case. 
Thus  Scotch  has  differentiated  itself  from  English; 
thus  also  the  three  countries  of  Scandinavia,  originally 
one,  have  now  different  languages;  thus  also  the  Taal 
spoken  by  the  Hollanders  of  South  Africa  is  so  different 
from  the  language  of  the  Dutch  people  that  Dutch 
literature  cannot  easily  be  understood  by  those 
whose  native  language  is  still  supposed  to  be  Dutch. 

The  man  of  education  who  understands  and  values 
his  native  tongue  should  watch  the  flowing  currents 
with  sympathy  and  yet  with  caution.  While  a  general 
attitude  of  conservatism  should  be  maintained,  dis- 
tinction should  be  made  between  those  changes  which 
impoverish  and  those  which  merely  simplify  the  lan- 
guage. Thus,  the  use  of  who  for  whom  in  questions 
produces  no  misunderstanding  and  tends  toward  sim- 
plicity, while  the  loss  of  the  subjunctive  were  would 
result  in  a  real  weakening  of  language  power. 

Grammar  then  is  the  preservative  of  language,  and 
the  natural  tendencies  of  the  science  are  necessarily 
conservative.  It  is  its  business  to  keep  out  solecisms, 
and  to  prune  away  irregular  growths  that  cannot  show 
good  reason  for  their  existence.  But  the  true  gram- 
marian \\-\\\  not  try  too  strictly  to  "margin  a  living  lake 
by  rigid  bounds."  It  is  his  privilege  to  be  not  only  the 
critic  but  also  the  interpreter  of  language,  both  in  regard 
to  its  past  history  and  its  present  tendencies. 


LX 


GRAMMATICAL    CHARACTERISTICS    OF 
ENGLISH* 

Poverty  in  grammatical  forms  is  no  drawback  to  a  lan- 
guage.— JESPERSEN. 

"The  simplest  of  all  languages  in  form,  the  most  spiritual 
in  the  mode  of  expression." 

English  grammar  is  at  once  the  simplest  and  most  difficult 
of  all  the  grammars. — ALLEN. 

English  enjoys  the  distinction  of  having  freed  itself  from 
ancient  and  unnecessary  inflections  to  a  greater  degree  than 
any  other  language. — CARPENTER. 

That  language  ranks  highest  which  goes  farthest  in  the 
art  of  accomplishing  much  with  little  means,  or,  in  other  words, 
which  is  able  to  express  the  greatest  amount  of  meaning 
with  the  simplest  mechanism. — JESPERSEN. 

An  elaborate  linguistic  structure  with  a  variety  of  endings 
in  declensions  and  conjugations,  has  certain  advantages, 
but  it  may  be  that  the  advantages  of  the  opposite  simplicity 
are  still  greater. — SCHLEICHER. 

Anglo-Saxon  is  the  basis  of  English.  All  its  joints,  its 
whole  articulation,  sinews,  ligaments,  articles,  pronouns, 
conjunctions,  prepositions,  numerals,  and  auxiliary  verbs- 
all  the  words  that  bind  together  the  sentence,  are  exclusively 
Saxon.— W.  H.  Low. 

*Some  of  the  facts  given  in  this  chapter  are  mentioned  in 
other  sedans  of  this  book.  But  a  brief  final  summary  of 
this  subject  seems  desirable. 

314 


Grammatical  Characteristics  of  English 

Hardly  less  wonderful,  perhaps,  than  the  extraordinary 
development  of  its  vocabulary  is  the  slow  process  by  which 
English  has  changed  from  a  synthetic  to  an  analytical  lan- 
guage. It  has  in  this  way  gained  greatly  in  simplicity, 
though  it  must  be  granted  that  there  has  been  in  some  degree 
a  loss  in  precision  and  in  delicacy  of  expression. — SOUTH- 
WORTH. 

It  is  safe  to  say  that  the  fixed  word  order,  the  freedom 
from  inflections,  the  abundant  use  of  prepositions  and  aux- 
iliary verbs,  which  characterize  modern  English,  are  a  dis- 
tinct improvement  upon  the  contrasted  phenomena  of  the 
older  languages. — TOLMAN. 

Great  is  the  English  speech — what  speech  is  so  great  as 
the  English! — WALT  WHITMAN. 

English,  however,  is  at  the  opening  of  the  twentieth  cen- 
tury the  greatest  language  power  in  existence,  and  bids  fair 
to  become  ultimately  the  universal  tongue. — SOUTHWORTH. 

It  is  in  its  vocabulary,  as  inherited,  acquired  and  adapted, 
that  English  finds  its  highest  claim  to  supremacy  among 
languages. — JOYNES. 

Grammar  it  (i.  e.,  English  language)  might  have  had,  but 
it  needes  it  not;  being  so  easie  of  itself  e  and  so  voyd  of 
those  cumbersome  differences  of  cases,  genders,  moodes  and 
tenses,  which  I  thinke  was  a  peece  of  the  Tower  of  Babilon's 
curse  that  a  man  should  be  put  to  schoole  to  learne  his  mother 
tongue.  But  for  the  uttering  sweetly  and  properly  the  conceits 
of  the  minde  which  is  the  end  of  speech  that  hath  it  equally 
with  any  other  tongue  in  the  world. — SIR  PHILIP  Sirr 
APOLOGIE  FOR  POETRY.  1585. 

The  English  is  plenteous  enough  to  express  our  myndos  in 
anything  whereof  one  man  hath  neede  to  speke  with  another, 
— SIR  THOMAS  MORE. 


816  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Most  of  our  knowledge  of  our  mother  tongue  comes 
to  us  by  what  are  called  Natural  Methods,  and  the 
distinctive  marks  of  the  language  being  native  to  our 
thought  are  not  always  recognized  clearly  even  when 
known  correctly  for  use. 

But  the  student  should  sometimes  step  outside  his 
own  relation  to  the  language  in  order  to  look  at  it  ob- 
jectively, to  compare  and  classify,  to  note  its  variations 
from  other  general  language  types  and  so  gain  a  more 
explicit  knowledge  of  its  distinctive  language  forms. 
The  scholar's  knowledge  of  a  language  should  be 
broader  and  deeper  than  that  of  one  who  would  simply 
use  the  language  as  a  vehicle  of  thought.  The  reasons 
of  English  grammar  must  underlie  a  scholarly  knowl- 
edge of  the  subject. 

English  has  inherited  traits  from  the  two  kinds  of 
languages  that  represent  the  two  ruling  races  of  Christen- 
dom, the  Roman  and  the  Germanic.  Yet  while  many 
English  words  are  of  French  or  Latin  or  Greek  extrac- 
tion the  grammar  of  English  is  mostly  Teutonic  in  char- 
acter. Its  idioms  are  Anglo-Saxon  and  not  Latin  or 
French  in  their  origin. 

But  modern  English  has  diverged  very  far  from  the 
original  Saxon  type  of  language  structure.  Instead 
of  being  a  highly  inflected  language,  it  is  now  one  of 
the  simplest  of  all  languages  in  its  word  forms.  While 
not  in  a  condition  of  absolute  simplicity  like  the  Chinese 
— which  requires  a  new  word  for  every  modification 
of  an  idea — it  is  yet  nearer  to  this  than  any  other  lan- 
guage of  Europe  is,  being  made  up  very  largely  of 


Grammatical  Characteristics  of  English       317 

short  indeclinable  elements  that  can  be  readily  com- 
bined into  all  needed  logical  arrangements. 

Languages  are  often  roughly  classed  into  two  groups 
as  showing  two  types  of  grammatical  structure.  Of  the 
synthetic  or  inflected  type  Latin  is  one  of  the  best  ex- 
amples, while  of  the  analytic  type  English  is  a  pro- 
nounced illustration. 

The  active  powers  of  English  in  making  inflectional 
forms  seem  now  to  be  reduced  to  the  action  of  two  or 
three  very  simple  rules.  The  addition  of  s  or  es  for 
plural  nouns,  of  9s  to  denote  possession,  of  er  and  est 
in  the  comparison  of  adjectives  and  of  s,  ed,  ing,  for 
verb  forms,  with  est  and  eth  in  solemn  or  poetic 
style — these  are  all  the  present  inflectional  powers  of 
English. 

But  while  the  active  inflections  of  English  are  few 
and  simple,  there  are  various  remnants  of  old  inflections 
still  remaining  that  seem  to  us  to-day  not  so  much 
like  real  inflections,  as  irregular  forms  with  which 
certain  ideas  have  become  associated.  These  give 
trouble  not  only  to  foreigners  but  to  native  speakers 
of  the  language,  and  mar  the  ideal  simplicity  of  English 
for  universal  use.  Yet  the  political  and  commercial 
growth  of  the  English-speaking  peoples,  together  with 
the  highly  analytical  character  of  the  language  itself  is 
giving  it  an  increasing  importance  among  the  languages 
of  the  world. 

By  the  changes  in  its  grammar  English  has  acquired 
certain  unique  and  high  powers.  The  record  has  been 
one  of  progress,  and  not  of  decay  or  retrogression.  The 


318  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

simple  form  allowing  free  interchange  of  grammatical 
functions  gives  peculiar  vigor  to  style.  With  some  loss 
of  freedom  of  arrangement,  there  is  nevertheless  an 
economy  of  words,  and  greater  idiomatic  power  and 
clearness. 

The  power  to  transfer  a  word  from  one  part  of  speech 
to  another  is  remarkably  developed  in  English.  An 
especial  prerogative  seems  to  be  the  power  to  change 
almost  any  noun  into  a  verb.  Thus  we  "cable"  our 
dispatches,  and  "phone"  our  verbal  messages.  We 
"table"  a  resolution  and  "bed"  plants.  Thus,  also, 
Skakespeare's  Portia  uses  the  phrase, "  Being  so  fathered 
and  so  husbanded." 

There  are  also  large  classes  of  words,  such  as 
the  adjective  pronouns,  that  belong  equally  to 
two  parts  of  speech.  The  power  of  a  word  to 
perform  several  functions  at  the  same  time  is  most 
remarkably  developed.  A  majority  of  the  connec- 
tive terms  (including  relative  pronouns,  relative 
adjectives,  and  conjunctive  adverbs  of  various  types) 
unite  in  the  same  sentence  the  offices  of  two  or  more 
parts  of  speech. 

English  is  very  rich  in  its  variety  of  verb  phrases. 
Foreigners  find  it  hard  to  learn  these  and  English- 
speaking  travelers  find  great  difficulty  in  rendering  all 
our  verb  phrases  into  the  idiom  of  other  tongues.  Many 
irregular  phrases,  for  instance,  are  in  use  as  substitutes 
for  the  future  tense.  The  following  examples  show 
different  ways  of  expressing  nearly  the  same  future 
action. 


Grammatical  Characteristics  of  English         319 

I  shall  write.  I  shall  be  writing. 

I  will  write.  I  will  be  writing. 

I  am  to  write.  I  am  to  be  writing. 

I  am  going  to  write.  I  am  going  to  be  writing. 

I  am  about  to  write.  I  am  about  to  be  writing. 

To  these  might  be  added  perhaps  the  interesting  Hiber- 
nianism, 

"I'll  be  afther  writing." 

"  Is  to  be"  is  one  of  the  most  common  future  phrases, 
as,  "He  is  to  be  married  to-morrow."  The  ordinary 
present  tense  may  be  used  with  future  signification,  as, 
"I  go  to-morrow,"  and  most  of  the  potential  auxiliaries 
may  also  be  used  so  as  to  convey  a  future  idea.  It 
may  fairly  be  said  that  in  the  abundance  and  flexibility 
of  its  verbal  combinations  English  is  not  surpassed 
or  perhaps  equalled  by  any  other  language  in  the 
world. 

English  is  not  particularly  rich  in  adjectives. 

"Ho,  for  an  epithet"  is  the  mental  ejaculation  of 
many  a  writer  in  search  of  choice  and  fitting  words 
with  which  to  clothe  his  thoughts.  In  passing  from  one 
language  into  another  adjectives  change  their  meaning 
more  than  nouns  or  verbs  do,  and  English  adjectives 
are  often  quite  different  in  meaning  from  the  foreign 
adjectives  to  which  by  form  they  are  allied. 

A  few  idioms  are  very  peculiar  to  English.  Among 
these  may  be  mentioned  the  use  of  the  same  term  self 
as  both  a  reflexive  and  an  emphatic  pronoun;  the  free 
omission  of  a  relative  pronoun  in  a  restrictive  adjective 
clause,  as,  "The  man  I  met,"  and  the  double  or 


Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 


cumulative  possessive,  as,  "This  speech  of  Caesar's." 
To  these  may  be  added  that  form  of  a  passive  sen- 
tence in  which  the  indirect  object  is  made  the  subject, 
and  the  direct  object  is  left  in  the  predicate  as  a  re- 
tained object,  as,  "I  was  given  some  oranges." 

But  the  phenomena  of  modern  English  are  not  very 
thoroughly  classified  and  known.  The  older  stages  of 
the  language  are  of  much  interest  to  scholars  and  are 
more  studied  than  the  shifting  phases  of  the  present. 
Grammars  and  dictionaries  are  necessarily  conserva- 
tive, and  are  never  quite  up-to-date.  But  the  study  of 
these  flowing  currents  and  marks  of  modern  English 
usage  should  be  of  great  interest  to  students  of  language 
and  of  life.  As  has  been  well  said, 

Those  who  are  born  to  be  heirs  of  a  highly  analytical  lan- 
guage must  needs  learn  to  think  up  to  it. — THOMSON'S 

OULTINES   OP   THE   LAWS    OF  THOUGHT. 


PART  SECOND 


RELATION  OF  GRAMMAR  TO  OTHER  KINDS 
OF  LANGUAGE  STUDY 

Even  the  analysis  of  sentences,  important  as  it  is,  has  its 
limits  as  a  means  of  instruction  and  training. — BUEHLER. 

It  is  intended  that  the  study  of  literature  be  taken  up  as 
early  in  the  course  as  is  practicable,  and  continued  in  such 
«.  way  as  to  supplement  the  technical  part  of  the  instruction. 
— LOCKWOOD. 

To  the  question  of  how  to  become  familiar  with  the  best 
use,  the  first  answer  is,  Read  the  best  literature. — BUEHLER. 

Practice  in  writing  should  be  constant. — LOCKWOOD. 

The  teaching  of  English  is  difficult,  its  results  often  un- 
satisfactory.— JOYNES. 

Hamlet. — Will  you  play  upon  this  pipe? 

Gilderstern. — My  lord,  I  cannot. 

Hamlet. — I  pray  you. 

Gilderstern. — I  cannot,  I  know  no  touch  of  it,  my  lord. 

Hamlet. — 'Tis  as  easy  as  lying.  Govern  these  ventages 
with  your  finger  and  thumb,  give  it  breath  with  your  mouth, 
and  it  will  discourse  most  excellent  music.  Look  you,  these 
are  the  stops. 

Gilderstern. — But  these  cannot  I  command  to  any  utter- 
ance of  harmony. — I  have  not  the  skill. — SHAKESPEARE. 

There  are  three  distinct  kinds  of  English  study  that 

321 


Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

must  enter  into  school  work.  They  are  adapted  to 
different  ends,  and  pursued  by  different  methods.  All 
of  them  are  important,  and  each  is  defective  if  not  sup- 
plemented by  both  of  the  others. 

There  is  the  formal  or  structural  study  of  the  lan- 
guage itself,  known  specifically  as  language  study  or 
linguistics. 

In  this  department,  grammar  is  the  central  study. 

But  the  formal  study  of  language  includes  also  all 
that  relates  to  spelling,  pronunciation,  etymology  and 
all  else  that  belongs  to  the  scientific  or  formal  make-up 
of  spoken  or  written  English.  This  line  of  work  is 
chiefly  technical.  Its  primary  aim  is  to  give  the  student 
control  of  his  native  tongue  as  an  instrument  that  may 
be  used  for  the  higher  ends  of  self  expression.  Yet 
grammatical  study,  by  its  appeal  to  the  logical  faculties 
has  educative  elements  that  are  broader  and  deeper 
than  belong  to  mere  technical  training. 

This  study  of  English  on  the  structural  side  begins 
with  the  earliest  grades  of  school;  but  it  also  reaches 
on  with  increasing  interest  and  importance,  through 
the  historic  and  comparative  philological  study  that 
belongs  to  high  school  and  collegiate  work. 

A  second  kind  of  English  study  for  schools  is  that 
which  is  pursued  by  literary  methods  and  devoted  to 
literary  enda  The  study  of  the  literary  treasures  of  a 
language  has  elements  of  culture  which  the  structural 
study  of  language  can  never  give.  It  touches  the 
emotions  and  cultivates  the  taste.  Its  appeal  is  to  tlie 
motives  and  the  spiritual  life  of  the  soul.  It  is  there- 


Relation  of  Grammar  to  Other  Language  Study  323 

fore  a  corrective  for  certain  faults  of  mind  that  merely 
technical  study  sometimes  induces. 

The  study  of  literature  used  to  be  thought  of  as 
belonging  to  the  later  part  of  school  life.  Yet  even  for 
the  youngest  children  in  schools  there  is  literary  mate- 
rial in  abundance  which  can  be  studied  for  artistic  ends. 
The  study  of  literature,  not  in  name  but  in  its  essence, 
should  begin  in  the  kindergarten  and  extend  through 
all  stages  of  school  and  college  life. 

But  literary  study  as  well  as  the  technical  study  of 
language  has  its  limitations.  The  study  of  a  literary 
masterpiece  is  in  a  degree  a  receptive  study.  It  does 
not  always  lead  to  active  effort  in  the  use  of  one's  own 
language  powers.  It  may  even  have  a  tendency  to 
paralyze  active  literary  effort,  as  one  yields  himself 
to  the  passive  enjoyment  of  the  work  of  others,  or  to  the 
sense  of  discouragement  sometimes  induced  by  the 
disparaging  comparisons  which  great  writings  invite 
toward  all  humbler  performances.  While  the  critical 
taste  is  cultivated,  the  creative  faculty  is  not  always 
iaroused  by  the  study  of  noble  writings. 

Both  literary  study  and  formal  language  study  there- 
fore need  to  be  reinforced  by  plenty  of  practical  com- 
position work.  By  well-graded  exercises  and  the  use 
of  stimulating  motives  the  teacher  should  call  forth 
the  best  creative  energies  of  the  pupil  and  lead  him 
to  the  habit  of  free  and  correct  expression  of  his  own 
thoughts  in  both  spoken  and  written  English. 

From  the  primary  school  to  the  university,  then, 
these  three  lines  of  English  study, — the  formal  or 


Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 


structural,  the  literary  or  artistic,  and  the  creative  or 
practical  —  need  to  be  pursued  side  by  side,  with  no  one 
of  the  three  overshadowing,  but  each  aiding  and  cor- 
recting the  others,  until  by  their  joint  actions  and  re- 
actions the  student  comes  to  deserve  the  praise  once 
bestowed  upon  an  English  scholar,  "He  was  well- 
languaged." 


n 


RELATIONS   OF  THE   STUDY   OF   ENGLISH 

GRAMMAR  TO  THE  STUDY  OF  FOREIGN 

GRAMMARS 

Most  of  us  wish  to  learn  other  languages  than  our  own. 
We  can  do  this  more  easily  and  accurately  if  we  understand 
how  our  own  language  is  made  and  used. — WHITNEY  AND 
LOCKWOOD. 

It  may  fairly  be  said  that  the  construction  and  compre- 
hension of  an  English  sentence  demand  and  suppose  the 
exercise  of  higher  mental  power  than  are  required  for  fram- 
ing or  understanding  a  proposition  in  Latin. — WELSH. 

There  is  a  strong  difference  between  the  analytical 
study  of  English  and  that  of  a  language  of  the  highly 
inflected  type.  In  Latin,  for  instance,  the  part  of 
speech  of  a  word  and  its  logical  relations  are  usually 
shown  by  its  inflectional  form.  But  in  English  it  is 
chiefly  the  sense  that  must  decide,  and  so  the  study  of 
the  English  sentence  has  a  disciplinary  value  that  is 
all  its  own. 

There  are  many  teachers  of  foreign  languages,  and 
educated  persons  that  have  drunk  deeply  from  the  full 
cup  of  classical  learning,  who  feel  a  doubt  whether  the 
study  of  English  grammar  can  give  much  aid  to  the 
acquirement  of  foreign  tongues. 

It  may  well  be  granted  that  a  knowledge  of  English 
inflections,  so  meagre,  so  incomplete,  and  seemingly 

325 


326  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

irregular  as  they  all  are,  is  but  a  slight  aid  to  a  study 
of  inflection  and  inflectional  agreements,  in  general 
grammar.  The  remnants  of  inflection  that  are  left 
seem  arbitrary  and  inconsistent,  and  seldom  give  an 
adequate  impression  of  inflection  in  its  true  sense. 

For  a  primary  knowledge  of  grammatical  inflections 
and  what  they  signify,  one  must  agree  with  the  report 
made  years  ago  by  Mr.  George  H.  Martin  (at  that 
time  agent  of  the  Massachusetts  Board  of  Education, 
of  which  he  is  now  the  secretary),  in  which  he  said: 
"  After  noting  carefully  the  mental  operations  of  thous- 
ands of  pupils  in  the  high  schools,  I  am  convinced  that 
nothing  can  take  the  place  of  Latin  in  high  school  work." 

But,  in  gaining  a  knowledge  of  the  syntax  of  Latin, 
that  is  spread  out  on  the  pages  of  the  Latin  grammar, 
and  that  is  so  vital  to  the  knowledge  and  use  of  the 
language,  will  a  knowledge  of  English  syntax  avail 
nothing  ? 

Is  a  knowledge  of  the  twelve  or  more  different  rela- 
tions in  which  an  English  noun  can  be  placed,  no  aid 
in  seeing  these  same  relations  when  found  in  another 
tongue?  Can  our  varied  objective  constructions,  the 
indirect  objects,  the  factitive  or  double  objects,  throw 
no  light  on  Latin  datives  and  accusatives? 

I  lave  the  absolute  constructions  of  other  languages, 
the  participial  and  infinitive  phrases  and  clauses,  the 
impersonal  or  unipersonal,  and  many  abbreviated 
forms  of  foreign  tongues,  nothing  to  gain  from  the  stu- 
<l<'iit's  knowledge  of  such  constructions  in  his  native 
speech? 


Study  of  English  and  Foreign  Grammars       327 

If  it  be  said  that  the  study  of  English  syntax 
gains  great  advantage  from  the  study  of  foreign  forms 
and  agreements  which  point  out  by  external  marks 
the  syntactical  relationships,  no  one  can  question  the 
truth  of  this  statement.  The  recognition  of  syntax 
relations  is  easier  when  the  word-form  is  limited  to  a 
certain  use.  No  one  can  deny  the  value  to  an  ele- 
mentary student  of  such  plain  guide  marks  as  inflec- 
tion gives  to  a  knowledge  of  the  structure  of  sentences. 

But  this  gain  is  chiefly  in  a  certain  elementary  part 
of  the  subject.  There  are  syntactical  relations  in 
every  language  which  far  transcend  all  the  powers  of 
inflection  to  point  them  out.  The  very  fact  that  in- 
flections are  largely  depended  on  to  show  syntax,  tends 
to  obscure  the  more  subtle  language  relations. 

While  Latin  study  can  greatly  aid  the  study  of  Eng- 
lish it  is  also  most  true  that  a  right  study  of  English 
constructions  will  bring  very  effective  aid  to  the  study 
of  Latin.  And  the  same  thing  is  even  more  true  in 
relation  to  the  modern  languages  which  follow  more 
nearly  than  Latin  the  English  type  of  structure. 

But  there  is  a  reason  still  greater  than  that  of  the 
inherent  nature  of  the  study,  why  the  study  of  English 
may  and  should  be  made  a  help  to  the  acquirement  of 
foreign  tongues.  The  mind  goes  always  most  natu- 
rally from  the  known  to  the  unknown,  from  the  native 
to  the  foreign.  The  facts  of  English  are  already  mostly 
in  the  possession  of  the  native  student.  He  has  not 
tested  nor  systematized  his  knowledge.  But  he  does 
understand  in  general  how  to  construct  his  sentences 


328  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

on  the  right  logical  basis,  and  to  put  the  words  that  he 
knows  into  their  right  order  and  relationships.  It  is 
good  pedagogy  and  good  sense  that  all  this  knowledge 
should  be  turned  to  account  in  gaining  entrance  into 
the  syntactical  relations  of  other  tongues.  To  ignore 
it  all,  to  begin  dogmatically  with  the  foreign  grammar, 
and  afterwards  compare  it  superficially  with  our  own, 
does  not  meet  the  demands  of  the  case.  The  thought 
and  practice  of  the  best  educators  to-day  is  against 
such  ignoring  of  the  value  of  English  study.  While 
careful  comparisons  should  be  made,  it  is  the  English 
construction  that  should  first  be  known,  and  the  empha- 
sis of  the  comparison  as  a  rule  should  rest  on  the  Eng- 
lish side. 

But  this  is  not  an  argument  against  the  early  study 
of  Latin,  nor  against  accepting  all  the  aid  that  it  can 
give  to  the  study  of  English.  Action  and  reaction 
must  both  be  allowed.  Comparisons  of  two  kinds 
of  grammar  made  from  both  sides,  will  do  more  for  the 
increase  of  language  power  than  either  alone  can  do. 

But  it  seems  reasonable  (and  the  results  are  also 
capable  of  demonstration),  that  after  the  student  of 
Latin  has  become  in  a  degree  familiar  with  the  com- 
mon Latin  inflections,  and  has  gained  a  general  insight 
into  the  government  and  agreement  of  inflectional 
forms,  the  later  study  of  Latin  has  as  much  to  gain 
from  the  study  of  English  as  it  can  contribute  to  the 
same;  nay,  that  it  will  receive  even  more  than  it  can 
give  by  such  comparative  study. 


Ill 


PLACE    OF    GRAMMAR    IN    THE    SCHOOL 

COURSE 

If  past  history,  experience,  and  the  history  of  education 
be  taken  for  guides,  the  study  of  grammar  will  not  be  neglected 
and  the  method  of  its  inculcation  will  become  an  object  of 
particular  inquiry  and  solicitude. — GOOLD  BROWN. 

The  body  of  grammatical  facts  appropriate  to  the  ele- 
mentary school  is  rather  limited. — CARPENTER,  BAKER,  AND 
SCOTT. 

A  little  technical  grammar  sympathetically  taught  is 
within  the  normal  powers  and  interests  of  grammar  school 
students. — LEWIS. 

The  teacher  can  introduce  the  idea  if  the  class  is  sufficiently 
advanced  to  take  it  without  getting  confused.  It  is  good 
teaching  to  give  children  hints  of  what  is  to  come. — BROWN 
AND  DEGARMO. 

Without  intelligent  interest  there  can  be  no  profitable 
study.  For  many  pupils  the  higher  study  of  English  gram- 
mar is  a  vain  and  cruel  martyrdom,  worse  than  a  waste  of 
time. — JOYNES. 

High  school  pupils  need  in  some  way  or  other  to  be  trained 
systematically  in  a  knowledge  of  the  important  facts  relat- 
ing to  inflection,  syntax,  sentence  structure,  word  order,  and 
word  composition  in  their  native  language. — CARPENTER, 
BAKER,  AND  SCOTT. 

Grammar  is  not  the  stepping-stone,  but  the  finishing 
instrument. — M.  MARCEL. 

329 


330  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

The  work  of  learning  to  speak  and  write  correctly, 
properly  precedes  technical  grammar.  The  ideal  plan 
is  for  the  child  to  be  reared  in  circumstances  in  which 
he  never  hears  any  but  correct  English,  and  so  finds 
no  other  kind  natural  to  him. 

But  the  circumstances  of  life  are  not  ideal  and  the 
child  who  enters  school  has  usually  many  faults  that 
need  correction.  For  these  and  other  reasons  the  lan- 
guage lessons  which  furnish  the  occasion  for  the  child 
to  gain  freedom  in  expression  must  also  supply  some 
simple  principles  of  criticism  that  will  enable  him  to 
recognize  and  so  to  correct  his  own  faulty  language. 

In  other  \vords,  the  language  work  of  the  lower 
schools  must  be  largely  constructive  and  proceed  along 
the  practical  lines  of  aiding  the  children  to  express 
themselves  correctly  under  intelligent  supervision.  But 
mingled  with  this  constructive  work,  even  from  an  early 
age,  there  should  be  some  analytical  work  also,  and 
some  attention  should  be  given  to  the  grammatical  facts 
that  come  within  the  range  of  the  child's  observation. 

The  teaching  of  these  elementary  principles  is  in 
a  sense  grammar.  Yet  it  is  not  a  scientific  course  in 
grammar.  The  facts  and  principles  are  not  intro- 
duced in  logical  order,  but  are  determined  by  the 
present  needs  of  expression,  and  the  faults  that  arc 
to  be  corrected. 

It  is  the  practice  of  some  teachers  in  their  elementary 
language  lessons  to  avoid  so  far  as  possible  the  terms 
of  technical  grammar.  The  forming  of  such  arbitrary 
compounds  as  action- words,  quality-words,  etc.,  illus- 


Place  of  Grammar  in  the  School  Course       331 

trates  the  devices  that  have  been  employed  to  avoid 
the  language  of  scientific  grammar. 

But  we  think  that  many  mistakes  have  been  made 
along  this  line.  While  there  can  be  no  objection  to  a 
roundabout  mode  of  expression  if  the  precise  scientific 
word  would  be  misunderstood,  or  if  it  interrupts  too 
much  the  present  purpose  of  the  lesson  to  introduce 
and  explain  it,  yet  the  true  grammatical  terms  are  all 
to  find  their  place  finally  in  the  pupils'  vocabulary. 

The  first  time  when  it  would  be  convenient  to  use 
the  word  would  seem  to  be  the  proper  time  to  intro- 
duce it.  Nor  is  it  needful  always  to  interrupt  the  les- 
son by  teaching  fully  the  scientific  meaning  of  the  terms, 
but  only  far  enough  to  prevent  any  present  confusion 
of  thought.  Logical  definitions  (if  grammatical  defi- 
nitions can  be  made  really  logical),  may  be  postponed 
until  a  later  period  of  study.  It  will  not  only  be  a 
saving  of  time  in  the  end  to  use  the  terms  of  grammar 
somewhat  freely  in  the  language-lessons,  but  it  is 
entirely  consistent  with  the  way  in  which  most  of  our 
words  are  acquired.  It  may  be  said,  not  of  children 
alone,  but  of  men  and  women,  that  among  the  words 
which  they  use  freely  and  correctly  in  speech  and  writ- 
ing, there  are  many  which  they  would  be  at  a  loss  to 
give  a  logical  definition  for,  and  that  the  dangers  in 
such  use  are  no  greater  in  the  vocabulary  of  grammar 
than  in  other  lines  of  thought. 

At  the  end  of  the  language-lessons  of  the  elementary 
course,  then,  the  child  ought  not  only  to  know  most  of 
the  important  facts  of  grammar,  but  the  terms  of  gram- 


332  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

mar  should,  to  a  considerable  extent,  be  familiar  to  his 
ear  and  thought.  But  the  simple  principles  of  language 
thus  gained  in  a  somewhat  desultory  fashion  through  the 
language-lessons  of  the  lower  grades,  need  to  be  reviewed 
and  placed  in  a  more  orderly  arrangement  in  the  child's 
mind,  if  he  would  hold  them  in  memory  ready  for  use. 

It  would  seem  that  the  work  of  the  last  year  of  the 
elementary  language-lessons  should  be  a  classified 
review  of  the  terms  and  principles  of  grammar  that  have 
already  come  before  the  children  in  applied  form. 
Such  a  year's  course  will  include  simple  definitions  of 
the  grammatical  terms  that  have  been  used.  It  will 
always  be  in  a  measure  unsatisfactory  with  a  certain 
proportion  of  the  pupils,  whose  interest  can  only  be 
aroused  by  subjects  of  a  less  abstract  nature  than 
analytical  grammar.  Yet  many  of  these  pupils  are 
well  ready  for  this  study,  and  if  it  be  entirely  relegated 
to  the  high  school  or  college  course,  those  who  never 
enter  upon  high  school  work  will  miss  entirely  the  special 
and  important  kind  of  linguistic  training  which  gram- 
mar alone  can  give. 

But  the  work  in  grammar  cannot  be  finished  in  the 
grammar  school.  Under  one  name  or  another  it  is 
an  important  part  of  the  high  school  course.  It  ex- 
tends itself  also  into  the  advanced  language  training 
of  the  college  and  the  university,  becoming  ever  more 
interesting  and  valuable  as  the  knowledge  of  foreign 
tongues  brings  the  student  into  closer  touch  with  all 
those?  lines  of  comparative  and  historical  grammar 
that  belong  to  the  large  realm  of  philological  research. 


IV 

DEFINITIONS  IN  GRAMMAR 

"It  is  difficult  to  make  perfectly  accurate  grammatical 
definitions,  and  still  more  difficult  for  a  pupil  to  understand 
them  accurately;  but  difficulties  are  not  surmounted  by 
being  evaded." 

Definitions  are  not  the  only  means  by  which  a  knowledge 
of  the  import  of  language  may  be  acquired  nor  by  which  the 
acquisition  of  knowledge  may  be  aided.  To  point  out  things 
and  tell  their  names  constitutes  a  large  part  of  the  instruc- 
tion by  which  the  meaning  of  words  is  conveyed  to  the  mind, 
and  sometimes  a  mere  change  of  terms  sufficiently  conveys 
an  idea.  Yet  if  we  would  guard  against  all  possibility  of 
misapprehension  and  show  precisely  the  meaning  of  a  word, 
we  must  define  it. — GOOLD  BROWN. 

Elementary  definitions  however  simple — or  even  incom- 
plete— must  be  strictly  true  so  far.  Nothing  should  be  taught 
which  in  either  method  or  matter  shall  ever  need  to  be  un- 
taught. — JOYNES. 

A  loose  definition  of  a  class  necessarily  fails  to  meet  the 
instances  that  arise;  consequently  easy  cases  alone  are 
noticed,  difficulties  are  slurred  over,  distinctions  are  con- 
founded; in  short,  where  explanation  is  most  wanted,  it  is 
not  forthcoming. — BAIN. 

Definitions  invariably  follow  the  completion  of  the  study 
of  that  which  is  defined. — W.  T.  HARRIS. 

Although  grammar  is  based  on  logic,  there  is  no 

333 


334  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

subject  of  school  study  in  which  it  is  harder  to  frame 
logical  definitions  than  in  this.  Indeed,  the  grammar 
definitions  which  are  strictly  logical  are  often  hard  to 
apply  as  tests  of  classification.  To  define  a  noun  as 
a  name  is  not  logical,  since  the  basis  of  classification 
for  parts  of  speech  is  the  relation  which  the  word  holds 
in  the  sentence.  Yet  no  definition  based  on  logical 
relationships  can  be  given  which  children  can  easily 
use  in  selecting  the  nouns  of  a  given  sentence. 

A  definition  that  seems  labored  and  confusing,  even 
if  it  is  true,  has  little  educative  value.  An  elderly  lady 
once  said  that  she  had  remembered  for  sixty  years  the 
definition  of  a  common  noun  as  she  learned  it  from 
Murray's  grammar :  "  A  common  noun  stands  for  kinds 
containing  many  sorts  and  for  sorts  containing  many 
individuals  under  them."  But  she  could  not  remem- 
ber that  she  ever  attached  any  particular  meaning 
to  the  phrases  which  she  had  thus  committed  to 
memory. 

The  difficulty  of  framing  grammatical  definitions 
that  are  wholly  satisfactory  is  plainly  illustrated  by  the 
failures  and  disagreements  of  the  text-books  in  trying 
to  tell  just  what  is  meant  by  case,  number,  mood,  etc. 
It  is  far  easier  to  see  the  difference  between  "book" 
and  "  books"  and  to  call  these  forms  singular  and 
plural,  than  it  is  to  decide  whether  number  is  "that 
property  of",  or  "that  change  of  form  which,"  or  "the 
distinction  between,"  etc. 

The  explanations  of  grammatical  terms  for  elementary 
classes  should  record  what  needs  to  be  understood  at 


Definitions  in  Grammar  335 

this  stage  of  the  teaching.  Fuller  understanding  and 
more  logical  definitions  will  follow  later.  The  early 
definitions  should,  however,  be  consistent  with  what 
is  to  follow.  Thus,  to  use  the  words  of  another  * 
"  That  a  pronoun  stands  for  a  noun  is  true,  but  not  *  to 
avoid  repetition  of  a  noun,'  which  is  only  true  in  cer- 
tain instances  and  is  incidental  to  the  real  character 
of  pronouns." 

Definitions  are  the  highest  and  most  difficult  depart- 
ment of  science.  There  can  be  successful  classification 
of  words  and  clear  recognition  of  their  grammatical 
forms  with  very  few  definitions  of  technical  terms. 
The  grammatical  work  of  very  elementary  classes  should 
be  somewhat  broadly  done.  Yet  enough  of  technical 
grammar  can  be  given  to  children's  classes  to  serve 
as  a  basis  for  the  very  large  amount  of  practice  work 
which  is  needed  to  lead  the  child  to  speak  and  write 
correctly,  and  also  to  know  the  reason  why  the 
forms  he  is  taught  to  use  are  the  correct  ones. 

By  advanced  students  of  English  finer  and  more 
numerous  distinctions  should  be  drawn.  In  this 
maturer  stage  of  the  study  the  student  should  form 
for  himself,  by  careful  examination  of  the  language  as  he 
knows  it,  logical  definitions  of  the  grammatical  terms 
that  he  uses.  The  most  educative  part  of  grammar 
study  will  lie  in  this  line. 

Yet  it  is  the  work  of  making  the  definition  that  is 
chiefly  of  value,  rather  than  the  definition  itself  after 

*Prof.  E.  S.  Joynes,  of  South  Carolina  College. 


336  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

it  has  boon  made.  With  the  successful  accomplish- 
ment of  the  effort  there  is  little  further  need  of  the 
definition  as  a  test  for  classification.  It  has  done  its 
work  for  the  student,  and  may  now  for  the  most  part 
be  safely  pigeon-holed  or  laid  upon  the  shelf. 


ANALYSIS  AND  PARSING 

"Ah,  it's  me,"  said  Mr.  Squeers,  "and  me's  the  first  person 
singular,  nominative  case,  agreeing  with  the  verb  it's  and 
governed  by  Squeers  understood,  as  a  acorn,  a  hour." — 
DICKENS. 

Since  the  English  Language  was  not  made  to  parse,  it  is 
not  necessary  that  we  should  subordinate  any  of  our  idioms 
to  parsing. — SNODDY. 

A  sentence  is  a  living  thing,   and  all  analysis  is,   in  a  way,   \ 
an  insult  to  it. — LEWIS. 

If  a  noble  sentiment  clearly  expressed  and  of  literary 
beauty  is  needlessly  subjected  to  grammatical  analysis,  that 
is  pedagogical  crime;  but  if  an  obscure  passage  is  being 
cleared  up  by  patient  analytic  process,  that  may  be  the  best 
teaching  possible. — BARBOUR. 

The  pupil  who  is  taught  to  separate  a  sentence  into  its 
elements  is  learning  to  analyze  thought,  and  consequently 
to  think.  —  PREFACE  TO  FIRST  EDITION  OF  GREEN'S  ENG- 
LISH ANALYSIS. 

The  intelligent  analysis  of  English  sentences  is  really  an 
analysis  of  the  processes  of  thought  there  expressed.  This 
discipline  is  fundamental  and  of  the  highest  value;  it  sharp- 
ens the  student's  power  of  insight  and  discrimination,  and 
helps  him  directly  in  every  department  of  his  work. — TOL- 

MAN. 

Analysis  should  be  confined  to  simple  sentences  until  these 
are  thoroughly  familiar. — JOYNES. 

337 


338  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

I  have  taught,  more  or  less,  almost  every  subject  embraced 
in  the  ordinary  school  or  college  course,  and  the  mogt  fruit- 
ful discipline  of  all  for  the  young  pupils  I  consider  to  be 
grammatical  analysis. — PRESIDENT  GARFIELD. 

With  the  birth  of  English  grammar  began  that 
time-honored  exercise  known  as  parsing,  which 
consists  in  giving  the  grammatical  description  of  each 
word,  by  naming  its  part  of  speech,  its  inflectional 
form,  and  its  relation  to  other  words  in  the  sentence. 
The  exercise  had  its  value,  but  the  numerous  proper- 
ties assigned  to  each  word,  and  the  parrot-like  repeti- 
tion of  rules  of  agreement,  sometimes  made  it  as  be- 
numbing to  the  faculties  as  it  was  tedious  to  the  listener. 

Kirkham's  grammar,  published  in  1823,  had  a  pro- 
nounced effect  on  the  teaching  of  English  grammar 
by  means  of  its  carefully  developed  "  Systematic  Order 
of  Parsing."  As  an  example  of  its  parsing  models, 
we  may  give  the  one  for  nouns. : 

Noun,  why  ?     Common,  proper  or  collective,  why  ? 

Gender  and  why  ?  Person  and  why  ?  Number  and 
why? 

Case  and  why?    Rule.     Decline  it. 

The  parsing  of  the  three  words  "John's  hand  trembles" 
occupies  an  entire  page  in  Kirkham's  grammar. 

In  1847  another  important  grammatical  event  oc- 
curred in  the  publication  of  Samuel  S.  Greene's  English 
Analysis,  which  was  soon  used  as  a  text-book  in  all 
parts  of  the  United  States.  Analysis  begins  with  the 
sentence  as  a  whole,  and  recognizes  phrases  and  clauses 
also  as  parts  of  the  sentence,  thus  adding  to  the  older 


Analysis  and  Parsing  339 

parsing  exercises  some  important  elements.  Yet  analysis 
as  well  as  parsing  has  a  tendency  to  exalt  technique  and 
to  become  tedious  through  repetition  of  useless  details. 

Another  objection  that  is  sometimes  urged  against 
both  analysis  and  parsing  is  that  by  the  emphasis  laid 
on  the  technicalities  of  language  much  good  literature 
has  been  deprived  of  its  true  literary  effect. 

This  misuse  of  grammatical  drill,  however,  has 
mostly  disappeared  from  American  schools.  In  the 
opinion  of  some,  the  reaction  against  parsing  has  been 
carried  too  far  and  it  would  be  an  advantage  if  some  of 
it  could  be  reinstated  in  American  schools.  There  is  a 
grammatical  drill  in  both  analysis  and  parsing  which  it 
is  foolish  to  frown  upon.  As  has  been  well  said, 
"  Although  what  is  called  parsing,  or  assigning  words 
to  their  part  of  speech,  is  a  juvenile  exercise  yet  it  is 
nevertheless,  the  surest  test  of  a  person's  having  learnt 
that  which  grammar  has  to  teach." 

The  botanist  who  investigates  the  structure  of  a 
flower  is  not  thereby  debarred  from  the  enjoyment  of 
flowers,  nor  from  seeing  them  also  in  poetical  relations. 
Neither  is  the  study  of  the  grammatical  structure  of  a 
piece  of  literature  necessarily  a  foe  to  the  appreciation 
of  its  aesthetic  value.  On  the  contrary,  excellences 
are  lost  upon  the  student  unless  he  first  grasps  the 
logical  relations  of  the  thought  itself;  and  the  attempt 
by  the  pupil  to  formulate  these  relations  gives  the 
teacher  the  best  evidence  as  to  whether  the  thought  is 
truly  understood. 

Parsing  in  Latin  is  chiefly  an  exercise  in  accidence;  in. 


Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

English  it  is  an  exercise  in  syntax.  Thesimpler grammat- 
ical ideas  are  easily  grasped  through  the  study  of  Latin, 
but  in  a  logical  language  like  ours,  parsing  has  another 
kind  of  disciplinary  value  that  is  not  to  be  depredated. 

For  the  convenience  of  teachers  some  models  for 
analysis  and  parsing  are  affixed  to  this  chapter,  but  each 
teacher  should  be  able  to  modify  all  such  models,  or  to 
construct  new  ones  according  to  the  needs  of  the  class. 
Parsing  models  should  be  as  simple  as  possible,  and 
emphasis  should  always  be  laid  upon  the  correct  inter- 
pretation of  the  thought  rather  than  upon  adherence  to 
the  form  of  the  model.  There  are  idiomatic  words  and 
phrases  to  which  models  cannot  apply,  and  in  dealing 
with  ordinary  sentences  there  is  constant  danger  of 
useless  repetition  of  points  already  fully  known.  The 
teacher  should  therefore  often  turn  from  the  formal 
model,  and  fall  back  upon  the  more  educative  exercise 
of  a  good  grammatical  "quiz." 

The  questions  for  this  are  of  two  main  classes :  First, 
questions  of  fact,  as,  What  part  of  speech  ?  What 
mode?  What  case?  What  relation?  and  second, 
the  still  better  class  of  questions:  Why  the  subjunctive 
mode  in  this  sentence  ?  Why  this  tense  or  case  ? 

In  a  word,  a  good  grammatical  drill  passes  lightly 
over  well-known  or  useless  points,  and  brings  out  th(;s(> 
of  greatest  linguistic  value.  In  the  hands  of  a  wise  and 
skillful  teacher  analysis  and  parsing  are  among  the 
most  useful  tools  for  language  teaching,  but  they 
should  both  be  used  always  for  broad  ends  and  not  for 
trivial  ones. 


Analysis  and  Parsing  341 

FORM  OF  ANALYSIS 

(To  be  used  in  whole  or  in  part  according  to  the  needs 

of  the  class.) 

T.  Kind  of  sentence. 

Declarative,  Interrogative,  Imperative,  Exclam- 
atory. 
Simple,  Complex,  Compound. 

NOTE. — Since  most  sentences  are  declarative,  the  first  dis- 
tinction needs  to  be  noted  only  when  the  sentence  differs 
from  the  assertive  form. 

II.  If  a  simple  or  a  complex  sentence,  give 

(1)  Entire  subject  and  predicate. 

(2)  Subject-word.     The  adjective  elements  that 
limit  it. 

(3)  Predicate  term.     (Name  copula  and  attri- 
bute if  distinct.)     Object  or  objects.     Adverbial 
elements. 

Later,  any  clause  or  phrase  (if  desired)  can  receive 
more  minute  analysis. 

(1)  Give  its  basis. 

(2)  Then  the  subordinate  parts. 

III.  If  the  sentence  is  compound 

(1)  Give  the  principal  divisions, 

(2)  Analyze  each  as  if  it  were  a  simple  or  com- 
plex sentence. 


342  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

FORM  OF  PARSING 

Part  of  Speech.     Inflectional  Form  (if  any).     Relation 
to  Other  Words. 

NOTE. — In  parsing,  lay  special  emphasis  on  all  peculiarities 
of  the  word,  either  of  form  or  relationship.  If  a  pupil  shows 
appreciation  of  the  real  character  of  a  word  it  is  not  well  to 
discourage  him  by  insisting  too  closely  on  adherence  to  a 
form  of  statement.  More  real  thought  is  often  awakened 
by  a  good  grammatical  question  than  by  formally  parsing 
the  word.  Models  should  be  used  so  far  as  they  save  time, 
or  stimulate  consecutive  thinking.  If  they  begin  to  con- 
sume time  needlessly,  or  to  stultify  fresh  thought  and  inter- 
est, it  is  time  to  dispense  with  them. 


VI 

SENTENCE  DIAGRAMS  AND  OTHER  DEVICES 

Some  device  by  which  the  whole  class  can  work  together 
may  be  of  value  in  large  classes. — SOUTHWORTH. 

A  diagram  is  almost  necessarily  misleading  in  many  ways. 
The  half  mechanical  accomplishing  of  diagraming  comes  to 
be  sought  rather  than  an  intimate  comprehension  of  the 
sentence.  Those  peculiar  features  of  a  sentence  which  can- 
not be  diagramed  are  lost  sight  of. — TOLMAN. 

At  this  stage  of  his  studies  the  pupil  should  not  be  required 
always  to  analyze  sentences  to  their  very  dregs,  nor  should 
he  be  expected  to  analyze  any  sentence  that  is  so  compli- 
cated as  to  be  very  puzzling. — KITTRIDGE  AND  ARNOLD. 

Too  minute  analysis  may  prove  perplexing  in  complex 
sentences.  Sufficient  drill  in  the  analysis  of  phrases  will  be 
given  by  the  simple  sentences. — HARPER  AND  BURGESS. 

In  the  study  of  the  individual  sentence,  analysis 
properly  precedes  the  work  of  parsing.  The  early 
t  xercises  in  analysis  should  be  of  a  broad  and  general 
kind,  marking  out  merely  the  main  features  of  the 
sentence.  There  should  be  abundant  practice  in  this 
general  analysis  without  confusing  the  pupils'  minds 
by  points  of  detail.  At  a  later  period  clauses  and 
phrases  should  be  analyzed  and  specific  words  parsed. 

In  dealing  witli  long  and  intricate  sentences,  a  rapid 
method  of  interpretation  called  "construing"  is  often 

343 


344  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

of  most  value.  It  is  a  kind  of  continuous  analysis,  a 
combination  of  the  methods  of  parsing  and  analysis 
giving  rapidly  the  functions  of  clauses,  phrases  or  words 
in  their  order,  but  pausing  here  and  there  for  fuller  dis- 
cussion of  the  more  difficult  points.  An  extension  of 
this  analytic  interpretation  to  the  paragraph,  or  to 
connected  thought  in  narrative  prose  and  poetry,  sup- 
plies some  elements  of  value  that  are  not  met  by  the 
analysis  of  single  disconnected  sentences. 

Caution  should  be  used  against  supplying  ellipses  for 
the  sake  of  ease  in  parsing,  when  they  are  not  needed  for 
the  correct  structure  of  the  sentence  itself;  nor 
are  dead  forms  and  idioms  always  to  be  explained  by 
analogy. 

A  device  once  extensively  used  in  grammar  teaching 
was  that  of  diagraming  sentences.  But  there  has 
been  a  great  reaction  against  its  use.  Teachers  dis- 
covered that  the  complications  of  English  sentences 
require  many  variations  of  the  form  of  diagram,  and 
that  some  of  the  subtler  points  of  analysis  can  never 
be  truly  shown  in  this  way.  In  short,  diagraming 
degenerated  into  an  unprofitable  puzzle,  the  technical 
effort  to  fit  the  diagram  to  the  sentence  crowding  out 
the  real  language  study,  which  is  the  main  object  of  the 
teaching. 

Yet  the  fact  that  there  are  limits  to  the  usefulness  of 
diagrams  is  no  reason  for  rejecting  them  wholly.  Many 
a  device  that  has  often  been  misused  is  still  of  value  in 
the  hands  of  a  wise  teacher. 

The  diagram  analysis  appeals  to  the  eye,  which  is 


Sentence  Diagrams  and  Other  Devices        345 

the  most  impressible  of  all  the  senses.  The  diagram 
can  be  made  rapidly  and  left  upon  the  blackboard  for 
further  study.  It  is  of  use  in  reviews,  being  specially 
adapted  to  the  testing  of  large  classes  to  see  whether 
logical  relations  have  been  truly  grasped.  It  gives  a 
great  saving  of  time  over  other  forms  of  sentence 
analysis. 

The  form  used  should  be  as  simple  as  possible  and 
omit  all  needless  elaboration.  One  diagram  that  has 
been  found  useful  is  simply  a  tabulated  statement  of 
the  great  sentence  elements,  as  illustrated  by  the  follow- 
ing sentence: — 

'Yesterday,  during  the  recess,  two  little  boys  of  my 
school  found  a  strange  animal  in  the  schoolyard." 


Subject,  boys. 


Predicate,  found 


Two 
little 
of  my  school 

a  strange  animal  (obj.) 
yesterday 
during  the  recess 
in  the  school  yard. 


The  detailed  analysis  of  the  phrases  is  omitted, 
since  the  relations  of  these  words  would  seldom  be 
misunderstood.  If  one  of  the  elements  of  a  sentence 
is  a  clause,  this  can  be  included  in  an  abbreviated  form 
and  then  analyzed  below  in  another  diagram. 

A  plan  of  analysis  which  does  not  involve  the  re- 
writing of  the  sentence  is  suggested  in  Southworth's 
English  Grammar  and  Composition.  This  is  ac- 


346  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

complished   by  means  of  underscoring,   overscoring, 
parentheses,  brackets,  etc. 

The  limit  of  usefulness  for  diagrams  is  very  quickly 
reached.  Idiomatic  phrases  and  all  complicated  points 
are  best  discussed  orally.  When  a  word  or  phrase 
holds  several  relations  in  the  sentence,  the  diagram 
is  likely  to  do  harm  rather  than  good.  All  of  the  sen- 
tence relations  need  to  be  expressed,  yet  the  repetition 
of  a  word  or  phrase  in  various  parts  of  the  diagram  gives 
confusion.  We  must  see  to  it  that  the  aids  we  use  in 
teaching  are  never  suffered  to  become  burdens  or  to 
detract  from  the  main  end  that  is  to  be  gained. 

To  sum  the  matter  up:  Diagrams  are  of  use  in 
teaching  and  in  testing  classes  (especially  young  classes), 
as  a  rapid  form  of  expressing  to  the  eye  the  general  rela- 
tions of  sentences.  But  for  difficult  points  of  analysis 
they  have  only  a  limited  value.  For  unravelling  the 
mysteries  of  idiomatic  English  nothing  can  take  the 
place  of  a  good  grammatical  "quiz." 


vn 

SOME  WORDS  TO  TEACHERS. 

Theory  guides  practice,  practice  modifies  theory. — BOYDEN. 
"It  is  easy  to  lay  down  general  principles,  but  hard  to 
apply  them  successfully." 

The  study  of  grammar  develops  and  perfects  those  forms 
of  thought  which,  like  the  honey-cell  of  the  bee,  only  later 
become  filled  with  rich  and  substantial  content. — JOYNES. 

Since  grammar  is  a  subject  that  must  be  taught  in 
the  schools,  happy  is  that  teacher  who  loves  to  teach  it, 
and  can  awaken  in  his  pupils  a  love  for  the  study.  It 
must  be  confessed  that  grammar  as  often  taught  pre- 
sents few  attractions  to  children;  yet  if  their  interest 
is  really  gained  there  is  no  subject  in  the  common 
school  curriculum  that  can  yield  larger  educative 
results  than  this. 

If  the  children  are  to  love  grammar  the  teaching  of 
it  must  be  adapted  to  their  age  and  experience.  They 
should  not  be  troubled  with  too  much  grammatical 
technique  until  they  know  enough  to  perceive  its  de- 
sirableness. It  takes  some  maturity  of  judgment  to 
appreciate  truly  the  value  of  a  close  analysis  of  one's 
own  thought.  The  teacher  should  not  waste  time  in 
what  may  seem  to  the  pupil  like  hair-splitting  discus- 
sions over  matters  of  no  practical  importance. 

It  is  not  easy  for  mature  minds  to  make  logical  defi- 

347 


348  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

nitions  of  grammatical  terms,  and  it  is  well-nigh  im- 
possible for  children  to  appreciate  or  apply  strictly 
logical  definitions  for  some  of  the  grammatical  terms 
which  they  need  to  use.  Because  of  this  difficulty 
some  teachers  demand  no  definitions  at  all  that  even 
approach  exactness.  There  is  certainly  a  serious  error 
to  be  avoided  on  this  side.  Loose  teaching  will  always 
produce  loose  thinking,  and  the  chief  value  of  grammar  is 
to  secure  careful  discriminations  in  thought  and  speech. 

How  then  shall  the  teacher  find  and  keep  the  wise 
mean  between  no  attempt  at  logical  definition  and  the 
labored  assumption  of  logical  correctness  which  makes 
the  subject  tedious,  and  is  useless  for  application  in  ele- 
mentary language  teaching  ?  Some  definitions  must  be 
given.  Some  logical  distinctions  must  be  drawn.  But 
the  number  and  form  of  these  must  depend  on  various 
circumstances  and  will  vary  greatly  with  different  classes. 

It  is  by  no  means  easy  to  keep  the  right  balance  be- 
tween looseness  and  inaccuracy  on  the  one  hand  and 
the  insistence  on  logical  exactness  which  lays  fetters 
hard  to  be  borne  upon  immature  minds.  But  on  the 
teacher's  skill  in  doing  this  the  success  of  the  work  in 
grammar  will  very  largely  depend. 

Grammar  may  be  taught  so  as  to  be  narrowing  and 
pedantic  on  the  one  hand  or  obscure  and  uninteresting 
on  the  other.  It  may  carry  its  analytical  method 
beyond  the  point  of  really  educative  influence  over  the 
minds  which  the  teacher  has  to  deal  with.  Grammar 
also  sometimes  assumes  a  false  arrogance  as  to  its  own 
authority  in  matters  of  usage.  The  emphasis  should 


Some  Words  to  Teachers  349 

always  be  laid  upon  real  facts  found  in  the  language, 
and  not  upon  negations  or  prohibitions  of  this  or  that 
form  of  expression.  It  is  hardly  worth  while  to  be 
continually  setting  up  men  of  straw  to  be  knocked  down 
by  argument. 

The  method  used  should  be  inductive  rather  than 
authoritative.  The  students  of  grammar  are  them- 
selves the  explorers  in  the  field  of  language,  working, 
however,  under  the  wise  guidance  of  one  who  has 
traversed  the  same  paths  before  them. 

The  teacher  must  not  forget  that  in  the  closer  dis- 
tinctions of  grammar,  absolute  decision  of  a  disputed 
point  cannot  always  be  reached.  The  grammarian 
must  not  be  over  positive  in  his  opinion  on  some  of 
these  points.  It  has  been  said  that  "  Dogmatism  saves 
time/'  but  does  it  in  the  end?  Two  interpretations 
may  sometimes  both  be  correct.  In  dealing  with  dis- 
puted questions  it  is  not  needful  always  for  the  teacher 
to  bring  every  one  of  his  pupils  to  the  same  under- 
standing of  the  intricate  points  that  he  himself  holds. 
He  should  have  a  definite  opinion,  of  course,  and  make 
it  known  to  the  class,  with  his  reasons  therefor.  But 
let  him  beware  how  he  dwarfs  the  power  of  judgment 
in  his  pupils  by  insisting  on  entire  unanimity  in  their 
verdict,  or  invariable  conformity  to  his  own  view.  In 
the  discussion  of  the  subtler  questions  of  syntax  it  is 
not  the  decision  reached  that  is  of  chief  importance. 
It  is  the  power  of  thinking  gained  by  the  effort  to 
compare  and  discriminate  the  relations  of  a  thought 
that  is  of  truest  educational  value. 


850  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Finally,  let  the  teacher  who  loves  language  Work  and 
has  labored  faithfully  for  liis  pupils  in  this  field,  be  of 
good  cheer,  even  if  the  results  seem  small.  In  every 
class  there  are  illogical  minds  that  grasp  imperfectly, 
or  sometimes  apparently  not  at  all,  the  abstract  relations 
of  the  ideas  and  words  with  which  grammar  deals. 
But  results  do  not  show  themselves  all  at  first.  Many 
are  the  men  and  women,  who  showed  no  brilliant 
powers  as  boys  and  girls  in  the  grammar  class  but  who 
yet  look  back  gratefully  upon  the  school  training  that 
gave  them  their  first  glimpses  into  the  character  of 
logical  thinking.  By  and  by  these  grammatical  ideas, 
partly  perceived  by  children,  grow  into  more  perfect 
clearness  in  their  minds  as  they  come  to  perceive  that 
the  fundamental  relations  of  thought  and  of  speech 
are  identical  and  that  a  knowledge  of  these  relations  is 
of  practical  importance  to  every  thinking  mind. 

The  real  results  of  school  work  are  seen  in  their 
true  perspective  relations  only  through  the  vista  of 
later  years.  But  even  if  the  work  of  the  grammar  class 
for  some  of  the  pupils  may  seem  to  be  but  a  qualified 
success,  it  should  not  cause  discouragement.  Gram- 
mar is  only  one  means  toward  language  power.  The 
teacher  is  only  one  of  many  agencies  that  are  at  work. 
Let  him  takeup  this  necessary  sub  ject  of  English  gramma  r 
withcourageousheart, feeling  sure  thatfaithfulworkalon# 
this  line  is  sure  in  its  own  time  and  way  to  contribute 
lar^e  and  important  elements  to  the  comprehensive  en<f 
which  is  perhaps  the  highest  result  of  education,  namely, 
the  jxTfection  of  thought  and  its  fitting  expression. 


VIII 

SOME  WORDS  TO  WRITERS 

Rules  for  style  as  for  manners  must  be  mostly  suggestive. 
— T.  W.  HIGGINSON. 

Remember  the  other  person.  I  must  write  with  pains, 
that  he  may  read  with  ease. — G.  H.  PALMER. 

Men  learn  to  think  accurately  and  hence  to  express  them- 
selves accurately  and  logically  by  the  experiences  of  life. 
Grammar  merely  aids  this  process. — CARPENTER,  BAKER, 
AND  SCOTT. 

No  writer,  however  brilliant,  should  be  excused  for  gram- 
matical errors  that  might  be  avoided.  —  MARSHALL  T.  BIGE- 
LOW. 

The  connective  parts  of  sentences  are  the  most  important 
of  all,  and  require  the  greatest  care  and  attention. — WRI- 
TER'S HANDBOOK. 

Learn  grammar,  learn  all  you  can  about  the  tools  with 
which  you  intend  to  work  all  your  life. — SHUMAN'S  STEPS 
INTO  JOURNALISM. 

Much  literature  that  has  become  standard  was  first  printed 
in  newspapers;  but,  as  the  newspaper  in  its  news  records  the 
life  of  every  day,  so  in  its  style  it  too  frequently  records  the 
slang  of  daily  life  and  the  faults  of  ordinary  conversation. 
A  newspaper  contains  bits  of  English  prose  from  hundreds 
of  different  pens,  some  skilled,  some  unskilled,  and  this 
jumble  of  styles  does  not  determine  good  use. — BUEHLER. 

Accuracy  and  dash  then — the  combination  of  the  two — 
must  be  our  difficult  aim. — G.  H.  PALMEU. 

351 


352  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Be  neither  too  lax  or  too  precise  in  your  use  of  language. — 
T.  W.  HIGGINSON. 

Good  style  is  impossible  without  grammatical  correctness, 
but  grammatical  correctness  does  not  necessarily  carry  with 
it  good  style. — KITTREDGE  AND  ARNOLD. 

Journalists  and  authors  as  well  as  teachers  have  a 
professional  interest  in  the  grammatical  characteristics 
of  English  usage.  The  power  of  the  daily  press  is  one 
of  the  strongest  influences  at  work  to  modify  language 
idioms.  Brevity  and  force  are  the  qualities  chiefly 
sought,  and  in  the  effort  to  gain  these  many  a  newspaper 
writer  seems  to  indorse  the  sentiment  of  Thomas  Jef- 
ferson who  wrote,"  Whenever  by  small  grammatical 
negligence  the  energy  of  the  idea  can  be  condensed  or  a 
word  be  made  to  stand  for  a  sentence,  I  hold  grammati- 
cal rigor  in  contempt." 

Possessive  cases  not  used  by  the  older  writers,  such 
as  "Boston's  mayor,"  "Chicago's  city  government," 
are  often  seen  in  the  daily  papers.  Even  phrases  of 
several  words  sometimes  receive  the  sign,  as,  "The 
Pacific  Coast  storm's  havoc."  (N.  Y.  Tribune),  Such 
expressions  have  conciseness  in  their  favor,  though  they 
mark  a  wide  departure  from  the  principle  given  in 
some  of  the  older  books  that  personality  is  necessary 
to  the  true  possessive  idea.  The  growing  frequency 
of  the  split  infinitive  whenever  logical  precision  or 
compactness  of  phrase  can  be  secured  thereby  is  largely 
due  to  journalistic  practice.  The  radical  tendencies 
of  the  daily  press  are  undoubtedly  carried  too  far.  But 
in  spite  of  some  carelessness  and  some  objectionable 


Some  Words  to  Writers  353 

disregard    of    linguistic    purity,    American    newspaper 
English  has  steadily  grown  in  strength  and  incisiven< 
so  that  it  has  been  justly  described  as  "  a  limpid,  strong, 
simple  and  fairly  admirable  vehicle  of  thought." 

But  although  a  journalist  can  perhaps  afford  to  be  a 
little  less  conservative  than  a  teacher  in  regard  to  new 
language  forms,  yet  for  him  also  the  general  rule  is  a 
safe  one: 

"Be  not  the  first  by  whom  the  new  is  tried, 
Nor  yet  the  last  to  lay  the  old  aside." 

Within  a  recent  period  the  proposed  establishment 
of  schools  of  journalism,  or  of  college  courses  for  jour- 
nalists, has  emphasized  the  idea  that  writers  can  have 
training  for  their  work.  It  may  be  said  that  the  studies 
for  a  journalist  are  of  general  rather  than  technical 
character.  Yet  there  is  certainly  a  choice  among 
general  subjects  to  be  studied  if  one  would  prepare 
himself  for  the  work  of  a  writer.  Grammatical  knowl- 
edge is,  indeed,  far  from  being  a  main  requisite  for 
successful  writing.  But  given  "a  call  to  write,"  the 
"sense  for  news,"  the  terseness  and  originality  of 
thought  that  produce  a  "telling  style,"  and  the  general 
common-sense  that  gives  adaptability  to  tin*  needs  of  a 
given  paper  or  class  of  readers,  it  is  still  possible  for  a 
journalist's  work  to  be  greatly  marred  by  a  lack  of 
grammatical  knowledge  or  by  carelessness  in  sentence 
constructions. 

The  work  of  the  book  writer  is  more  deliberate  than 
that  of  the  journalist  and  requires  still  greater  cure  in 


354  Grammar  and  Its  Reason* 

style  and  grammatical  construction.  Imperfections 
of  grammar  that  may  be  to  a  degree  pardonable  in  a 
daily  newspaper  would  effectually  kill  a  more  dignified 
effort  at  bookmaking.  Authors,  even  more  than 
journalists,  cannot  afford  to  undervalue  the  need  of 
familiarity  with  all  the  tests  of  grammatical  correctness 
that  can  be  applied  to  their  work. 

Even  for  the  technical  forms  of  a  written  paper, 
grammatical  knowledge  is  required.  Punctuation  is 
dependent  upon  grammar.  Marks  of  punctuation 
are  simply  the  mechanical  means  of  interpreting  the 
grammatical  relations  of  the  sentence.  Even  for  this, 
the  most  formal  part  of  a  writer's  work,  a  knowledge 
of  grammar  must  lie  at  the  basis. 

Many  journalistic  writers  are  led  into  their  work 
by  force  of  circumstances  rather  than  premeditated 
choice.  Employment  on  some  country  paper  is  often 
the  first  step  toward  the  higher  walks  of  journalism, 
and  there  are  hosts  of  country  editors  and  local  re- 
porters who  have  drifted  into  their  profession  without 
college  training  or  any  extended  courses  of  study. 
For  these  and  for  other  busy  writers  compendiums  of 
grammar  seem  to  be  needed  that  are  neither  so  element- 
ary as  the  ordinary  school  text-books  of  grammar,  nor 
so  profound  as  most  of  the  works  on  philology.  There 
are  certain  flagrant  errors  that  occur  so  often  in  the 
work  of  young  or  careless  writers  that  they  become  a 
weariness  to  the  more  experienced  editors  or  critics 
on  whom  devolves  the  task  of  correcting  the  imperfect 
manuscript.  To  meet  such  cases  various  lists  of 


Some  Words  to  Writers  355 

"Don'ts"  for  -writers  have  boon  compiled,  as  William 
Cullen  Bryant's  once  famous  Index  Expurgatorius, 
\vhicli,  however,  condemned  some  things  that  would 
now  pass  without  criticism.  "Is  being  done,"  for  in- 
stance, is  now  in  general  use.  Some  of  these  "Don'ts" 
belong  to  the  field  of  diction  rather  than  that  of  gram- 
mar, but  many  have  a  grammatical  bearing  also. 

Among  many  "Don'ts"  which  writers  may  well  pay 
heed  to,  the  following  may  be  noted : 

Don't  use  couple  for  two;  lengthy  for  long;  expect  for 
believe;  aggravate  for  irritate;  stopped  for  stayed  (He 
stopped  at  the  hotel) ;  past  for  last  (the  past  two  weeks) ; 
less  for  fewer;  without  for  unless;  if  for  whether;  such 
for  so;  between  for  among;  quite  for  very  or  rather  (as 
quite  pretty;  quite  means  entirely);  during  for  in 
(during  means  throughout);  but  what  for  but;  as  for 
that  (I  don't  know  as  I  shall  go);  as  though  for  as  if. 
(Fill  out  the  ellipsis  and  see  which  conjunction  is 
needed,  as,  He  walks  as  [he  would  walk]  if  [not  though] 
he  were  tired.) 

Don't  use  a  plural  verb  or  pronoun  after  each  and  every. 

Don't  say  and  which  (unless  there  are  co-ordinate 
clauses  with  which),  or,  "  Try  and  do  it "  for  "  Try  to  do 
it." 

Don't  use  superfluous  words,  as,  ponder  (over);  All 
(of)  those  needles;  Come  back  (again);  Where  is  he 
gone  (to)  ?  Don't  speak  of  a  "widow-woman"  or  of 
"new  beginners." 

Don't  use  contractions  often  in  writing,  and  never 
the  wrong  contraction  (as  don't  for  doesn't). 


356  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

Don't  be  careless  as  to  the  use  or  the  omission  of 
articles. 

If  connected  phrases  or  clauses  require  different 
particles  or  connectives  see  that  each  is  expressed, 
as,  "  This  is  as  old  as  or  even  older  than  the  other/' 
("  as  "  is  sometimes  erroneously  omitted.) 

Say  /  if  you  mean  I,  and  not  we.  The  editorial  we 
is  often  abused. 

Don't  mix  thou  and  you  pronoun-forms  in  the  same 
piece  of  writing.  This  is  sometimes  done  by  writers 
of  verse. 

Don't  omit  pronoun  subjects  merely  for  the  sake  of 
brevity.  The  telegraphic  style  (Went  to  New  York; 
consulted  with  the  mayor;  attended  a  committee 
meeting,  etc.),  is  not  to  be  commended. 

Don't  allow  a  verb  to  be  attracted  into  a  tense  that 
does  not  belong  to  it  as,  "He  declared  the  moon  was 
made  of  green  cheese,"  "He  hoped  to  have  gone  to 
Europe."  The  older  writers  allowed  such  attractions 
as  giving  unity  to  the  sentence,  but  modern  English 
does  not  favor  them. 

If  you  use  a  pronoun,  either  personal  or  relative,  have 
a  care  that  its  antecedent  and  agreements  are  both 
correct  and  evident. 

Don't  make  quotations  carelessly  nor  use  "dangling 
participles,"  and  before  using  a  parenthetical  sentence 
or  a  long  involved  construction  ask  yourself  whether 
two  separate  sentences  would  not  better  express  the 
thought. 

But  a  writer  needs  a  deeper  knowledge  of  grammar 


Some  Words  to  Writers  357 

than  is  suggested  by  a  list  of  grammatical  "Don'ts"  if 
he  is  to  be  a  discriminating  critic  of  his  own  writings 
and  a  master  of  the  tools  of  his  trade.  The  harder 
questions  of  syntax  are  the  subtle  ones  that  do  not  even 
occur  to  the  superficial  mind.  For  these  no  rules  will 
be  of  much  avail.  There  must  be  clear  discernment 
of  all  the  intrinsic  relations  of  the  sentence.  Unless 
these  are  as  familiar  to  the  writer  as  are  the  hidden 
parts  of  his  engine  to  the  competent  machinist  it  is 
impossible  that  he  should  know  what  is  the  matter 
with  a  halting  sentence  or  how  to  change  it  so  as  to  give 
it  effectiveness. 

It  may  be  said  that  there  have  been  good  writers 
who  had  no  grammatical  training,  and  also  that  there 
are  instances  in  which  an  extensive  knowledge  of  phil- 
ology seems  to  induce  erudite  sentence  forms  that  are 
fatal  to  force  of  expression.  John  Bright  was  one  of 
the  most  forcible  of  writers.  General  Grant  in  his 
"Memoirs"  showed  himself  superior  as  a  master  of 
style  to  most  of  the  trained  linguists.  But  both  John 
Bright  and  General  Grant  had  the  logical  habit  of 
mind,  however  it  had  been  gained.  The  study  of 
grammar  is  not  the  only,  nor  indeed  the  chief  means 
by  which  a  person  learns  to  think  logically.  Yet  it 
is  one  of  the  important  correctives  to  that  turgid,  illog- 
ical manner  of  thinking  which  expresses  itself  in  long, 
involved  and  loosely  related  sentences  that  weary  and 
confuse  the  mind  of  the  reader. 

The  understanding  of  difficult  grammatical  construc- 
tions is  no  hindrance  to  simple  forms  of  expression.  On 


358  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

the  contrary,  the  one  who  best  understands  these  com- 
plex relationships  is  the  one  most  likely  to  choose  the 
simple  sentence  for  ordinary  purposes,  reserving  the 
complex  constructions  for  those  cases  where  they  are 
really  needed.  A  logical  thinker,  if  he  uses  a  long 
sentence  at  all,  will  usually  construct  it  after  a  very 
simple  plan, — perhaps  as  a  sequence  of  clauses  or 
phrases  co-ordinate  with  one  another  or  formed  after 
a  similar  pattern.  It  has  been  said  that  the  longest 
sentence  known  is  that  of  "  The  House  that  Jack  Built," 
which  is  composed  chiefly  of  adjective  clauses  piled  one 
upon  another. 

The  great  principle  of  style,  according  to  Herbert 
Spencer,  is  economy  of  the  reader's  attention.  This  is 
secured,  first  of  all,  by  having  the  plan  of  the  sentence 
such  as  to  give  perfect  clearness  of  meaning.  Perspicu- 
ity and  precision  are  due  more  to  the  forms  of  sentence 
construction  than  to  anything  else.  An  inexperienced 
writer,  in  reviewing  his  own  work  does  well  to  ask 
himself,  "  Have  I  made  it  perfectly  evident  what  is  the 
subject  of  every  verb,  the  antecedent  of  every  pro- 
noun, and  the  modifying  relation  of  each  adjunct 
term?  If  not,  if  the  reader's  mind  is  delayed  for  an 
instant  by  any  doubt  as  to  the  relations  of  ideas  in  the 
connected  thought,  attention  is  distracted  and  the 
style  is  weakened. 

The  good  writer  will  recognize  not  only  the  logical 
relations  within  a  given  sentence,  but  also  those  which 
hind  the  sentences  themselves  into  an  harmonious 
whole.  He  must  have  a  keen  sense  of  the  idea  of  and, 


Some  Words  to  Writers  359 

but,  or,  if,  because,  or  therefore9  between  the  successive 
thoughts.  He  must  also  know  whether  this  idea  will  be 
apparent  without  the  medium  of  an  expressed  conjunc- 
tion. He  needs  also  many  synonymous  terms  or  ex- 
pedients by  which  he  can  give  variety  to  his  sentence 
connections  and  avoid  the  infelicity  of  the  too  frequent 
use  of  the  same  conjunction.  Among  the  niceties  of 
style  there  is  perhaps  nothing  that  distinguishes  a  good 
writer  more  than  the  pertinent  use  of  connectives,  mak- 
ing the  flow  of  thought  consecutive  while  avoiding  all 
redundancy  of  expression. 

Many  of  the  specific  grammatical  points  which  a 
writer  must  deal  with  relate  to  the  question  of  concord 
or  agreement,  especially  when  a  collective  noun,  or  a 
"false  plural"  (as  wages)  is  used,  or  when  there  is  a 
hovering  sense  of  either  singular  or  plural.  Since  most 
verbal  forms  are  neutral  in  number,  cases  of  agreement 
are  so  rare  that  when  they  occur  at  all  they  ought  to 
add  something  to  the  effect  of  a  sentence  and  not  detract 
from  it.  If  the  idea  of  singularity  or  plurality  is  spe- 
cially important  it  is  well  that  the  verb  form  should 
emphasize  this  prominence.  Thus  in  "A  thousand 
years  is  as  one  day"  the  singular  verb  gives  emphasis 
to  the  fact  that  the  thousand  years  is  but  one  period  of 
time. 

There  are  instances  in  which  the  mere  sound  of 
the  sentence  suggests  a  disagreement  that  is  a  blemish 
to  style,  even  if  not  strictly  a  grammatical  error.  One 
of  the  best  marks  of  a  good  writer  is  that  he  can  evade 
the  question  of  doubtful  concord  so  that  the  reader  will 


360  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

not  be  troubled  with  any  questions  regarding  it.  In- 
stead of  "Cards  were  invented  to  amuse  an  insane 
king"  it  is  better  to  say  "The  game  of  cards  was  in- 
vented." Instead  of  "Damages  were  awarded,"  it 
may  be  better  to  say  "The  jury  awarded  damages." 
A  neutral  form  of  the  verb  can  often  be  substituted  for 
the  form  that  requires  concord.  Thus  in  "  Nine  tenths 
of  the  happiness  of  mankind  depends  on,"  etc.,  some 
verb  phrase  as  "must  depend,"  "will  depend,"  may 
sometimes  be  preferable.  In  "Neither  poverty  nor 
riches  affect  (affects)  a  man's  happiness,"  a  careful 
writer  will  often  choose  a  neutral  phrase,  as,  "will 
affect,"  "can  affect." 

The  great  principle  of  economy  of  attention  is  appli- 
cable here.  The  writer's  own  discriminating  judg- 
ment must  decide  whether  grammatical  agreement 
shall  be  brought  directly  before  the  reader's  mind, 
or  avoided,  as  not  increasing  the  precision  or  force 
of  the  sentence. 

Some  of  the  least  satisfactory  attempts  at  concord 
occur  in  the  use  of  pronouns  having  both  gender  and 
number  agreements,  as,  "  If  any  one  calls  tell  (him  ? 
him  or  her  ?  them  ?)  I  am  not  at  home."  While  literary 
usage  has  adopted  the  use  of  him  in  such  cases  (unless 
only  women  are  in  the  class  referred  to),  grammatical 
fastidiousness  sometimes  employs  the  awkward  and 
obtrusive  him  or  her,  while  colloquial  disregard  of 
grammatical  fetters  tends  more  and  more  to  substitute 
them  as  the  preferred  neutral  form.  But  an  evasive 
expression  such  as  "Say  I  am  not  at  home,"  has  its 


Some  Wards  to  Writers  3C1 

own  advantages  in  the  situation.  "Avoid  the  appear- 
ance of  evil"  is  a  good  rule  of  grammar  as  urll  as  of 
morals. 

But  among  the  grammatical  questions  wlii<  h  <  ngage 
the  writer's  attention  none  are  more  important  or  per- 
plexing than  those  that  relate  to  the  order  of  the  parts 
of  the  sentence.  And  here  few  rules  can  be  given.  The 
only  rule  of  much  value  is  the  general  one:  Keep  tli<> 
parts  that  are  related  near  together,  letting  nothing 
intervene  that  will  confuse  the  mind  as  to  the  relation 
that  is  intended.  To  keep  a  relative  clause  near  its 
antecedent,  a  participial  phrase  near  the  noun  which 
it  limits,  and  such  adverbs  as  only  and  even  next  to  the 
words  which  they  modify,  these  are  some  of  the  sim- 
plest points  to  be  observed.  But  questions  of  euphony, 
rhythm,  emphasis,  and  agreeable  variety  in  sentence 
forms  are  also  involved  in  the  word  order  to  be  chosen. 

An  exercise  in  composition  sometimes  used  in  schools 
consists  in  arranging  a  sentence  in  all  possible  ways 
that  are  consistent  with  grammatical  correctness  and 
then  deciding  upon  the  comparative  merits  of  these 
sentence  forms.  Although  the  professional  writ  IT 
has  passed  beyond  the  period  for  such  juvenile  <  \ 
his  mind  must  nevertheless  be  continually  performing 
a  somewhat  similar  process  regarding  the  sentences 
that  he  writes. 

When  a  sentence  contains  'several  adverbial  ele- 
ments,  either  words,  phrases  or  clauses,  it  may  require 
no  little  study  to  distribute  them  most  effectively.  If 
there  are  several  long  adverbial  elements  one  is  usually 


362  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

found  at  the  beginning  of  the  sentence,  as,  "After  this 
conversation  he  went  at  once  to  the  city  to  look  for 
"work."  One  of  the  most  common  ways  of  effecting  an 
inversion  is  to  put  an  adverb  at  the  beginning,  as, 

Now  came  still  evening  on. 
Then  ensued  a  lively  scene. 

While  questions  of  word  order  are  grammatical 
questions,  it  is  by  constructive  effort  rather  than  by 
ordinary  grammatical  analysis  that  they  are  to  be 
solved.  It  is  by  practice  in  writing,  aided  by  some 
grammatical  tests,  that  a  writer  acquires  skill  in  his 
sentence  arrangements. 

The  pressure  that  is  often  felt  by  the  journalist  to 
write  rapidly  and  also  in  a  way  to  win  instant  attention, 
gives  peculiar  temptations  to  the  disregard  of  gram- 
matical principles.  But  a  writer  cannot  afford  to  forget 
that  while  "grammatical  correctness  does  not  necessarily 
carry  with  it  good  style,"  it  is  also  emphatically  true 
that  "good  style  is  impossible  without  grammatical 
correctness," 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

A  list  of  books  relating  to  the  history  and  structure  of 
English  is  here  added.  It  includes  also  some  books  dealing 
with  modern  methods  of  teaching  English,  and  some  modern 
school  grammars. 

"Progress  in  Language,  with  Special  Reference  to  Eng- 
lish," by  Jens  Otto  Harry  Jesperson.  London,  1894. 

"New  English  Grammar,"  2  vols.,  by  Henry  Sweet.  Ox- 
ford (1892)  1900. 

"A  Primer  of  Historical  English  Grammar,"  by  Henry 
Sweet.  Oxford,  1893. 

"The  Philology  of  the  English  Tongue,"  by  John  Earle. 
Oxford,  1892. 

"A  Simple  Grammar  of  English  Now  in  Use,"  by  John 
Earle.  Putnam's  Sons,  1898. 

"Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  History  of  Language," 
by  H.  A.  Strong,  W.  S.  Logeman,  and  B.  I.  Wheeler.  Long- 
mans, Green  &  Co.,  1891. 

"Principles  of  English  Grammar,"  by  G.  R.  Carpenter, 
1899. 

"Grammatical  Characteristics  of  English,"  by  E.  S. 
Joynes.  Columbia,  S.  C.,  1900. 

"The  English  Language;  Its  Grammar,  History,  and 
Literature,"  by  Meiklejohn.  Heath  &  Co.,  1898. 

"An  English  Grammar,  Methodical,  Analytical,  and  His- 
torical," 3  vols.  by  Maetzner.  Berlin.  Translated  by  Clair 
James  Greece.  London,  1874. 

"History  of  the  English  Language,"  by  T.  R.  Lounsbury. 
Henry  Holt  &  Co.,  1897. 

"Historical  Outlines  of  English  Syntax,"  by  Leon  Kellner. 
Macmillan  Co.,  1892. 

363 


364  Grammar  and  Its  Reasons 

"The  New  English,"  by  Kington  Oliphant.  Macmillan 
Co.,  1892. 

"English,  Past  and  Present,"  by  Richard  Chevenix  Trench. 
1868. 

"Essentials  of  English  Grammar,"  by  Wm.  Dwight  Whit- 
ney. 1877. 

Studies  in  English,"  by  M.  Schele  de  Vere.     1867. 
Grammar  of  Grammars,"  by  Goold  Brown,  1851. 
Higher  English  Grammar,"  by  Alexander  Bain.     1879. 
English   Grammar  as   Bearing  upon  Composition,"   by 
Alexander  Bain.     Henry  Holt  &  Co.,  1874. 

"Language  and  Linguistic  Method,"  by  S.  S.  Laurie. 
Edinburgh,  1893. 

"The  Teaching  of  English,"  by  P.  Chubb.  The  Macmillan 
Co.  1902. 

"The  Teaching  of  English,"  by  G.  R.  Carpenter,  F.  T. 
Baker,  and  Fred  N.  Scott.  Longman's,  Green  &  Co.  1903. 
SOME  MODERN  TEXT-BOOKS  IN  GRAMMAR. 

"A  Modern  English  Grammar,"  by  H.  G.  Buehler.     1900. 

"Modern  English  Lessons."  Buehler  and  Hotchkiss. 
1903. 

"English  Grammar,"  by  Whitney  and  Lockwood.  Ginn 
&  Co.,  1896. 

"Elements  of  English  Grammar,"  by  Alfred  S.  West. 
Cambridge,  Eng.,  1893. 

Longman's  "English  Grammar."    New  York,  1901. 

"Applied  Grammar,"  by  E.  H.  Lewis,  New  York,  1902. 

"The  English  Sentence,"  by  Lillian  G.  Kimball.  Ameri- 
can Book  Co.,  1900. 

"English  Grammar,"  by  Baskervill  and  Sewall,  Cincinnati, 
1893. 

"Principles  of  English  Grammar,"  by  Davenport  and 
Emerson.  Macmillan  Co.  1898. 


Bibliography 


"Advanced  Grammar  and  Composition,"  by  E.  O.  Lyte. 
1890. 

"English  Grammar  for  Schools,"  by  Hall,  Sonnenschein 
&  Co.  London,  1889. 

"The  English  Language,"  Manley  and  Hailman.  iiur- 
chard  &  Co.  1903. 

"Inductive  Studies  in  English  Grammar."  Harper  and 
Burgess.  American  Book  Co.  1894. 

"Grammar  Lessons."  Gordy  and  Mead.  Scribners'  Sons. 
1904. 

"Elements  of  English  Grammar."  Brown  and  DeGarmo. 
Werner  School  Book  Co.  1900. 

"A  Syllabus  of  English  Grammar."  L.  C.  Foster.  Mac- 
millan  Co.  1898. 

"The  English  Language  and  its  Grammar."  Irene  M. 
Mead.  Silver,  Burdett  &  Co.  1896. 

"Lessons  on  Language,"  by  Tarbell.     Ginn  &  Co.     1894. 

"New  Lessons  on  Language,"  by  G.  A.  South  worth.  San- 
born  &  Co.  1902. 

"English  Grammar  and  Composition,"  by  G.  A.  South- 
worth.  Sanborn  &  Co.  1901. 

"School  Grammar  of  the  English  Language."  Edward  A. 
Allen.  D.  C.  Heath  &  Co.  1900. 

"The  Mother  Tongue."  Kittredge  and  Arnold.  Ginn  & 
Co.,  1900. 

"Practical  English  Grammar."  Mary  F.  Hyde.  D.  C. 
Heath  &  Co.  1901. 

"The  Essentials  of  Language  and  Grammar,"  by  Albert 
Le  Roy  Bartlett.  Silver,  Burdett  &  Co.,  1900. 

"English  Grammar,"  by  Metcalf.  American  Book  Co. 
1804. 

"Advanced  Lessons  in  Grammar/'  by  Maxwell.  American 
Book  Co.  1891. 


INDEX 


a  or  an,  67,  126 

a  as  preposition,  129 

Abridged  clauses,  240,  241 

Ablative  case,  7,  242 

Absolute   construction,    242, 
243 

Absolute  pronouns,  135 

Accusative    case,    274,    276, 
288 

Abstract  nouns,  119 

Adjectives,  38,  122 

comparison,  97;  classes, 
123;  derivation,  124;  ap- 
propriate use,  125 

Adjective  pronouns,  138 

classes,  139;  inflection, 
140 

Adverbs,  213,  220 

numeral,  144;  relative, 
152;  interrogative,  147; 
modal,  214,  216;  termin- 
ation ly,  215;  position, 
205,  216,  248,  249;  use 
and  abuse,  217 

Adverbial  object   121 

Agreement  (or  Concord)  65, 
66,  68,  137,  153,  359 

in  person,  71 ;  in  number, 
76;  in  gender,  83;  of 
articles,  127 


Analysis,  3,  16,  21,  337,  343 
models,  341;  analysis  of 
verb  phrases,  169 

Anglo-Saxon  language,  63, 
149,  306,  316 

Antecedent,  68,  83,  149 

Appositives,   89,   120 

Articles,  39,   126-129 

as,   152,  276 

Attribute,  34,   49,   102,  155 

Auxiliary  verbs,  155, 164,  168 
importance  and  growth, 
166;  difficulties  of  for- 
eigners, 174 

be,  45,  71,  103,  108,  114,  154, 
165,  167,  168,  169,  282, 
287 

principal  parts,  156; 
auxiliary,  165;  in  intran- 
sitive phrases,  166;  sub- 
junctive forms,  193 

being  built,  is  building,  105 

Bible  language,  184,  197,  309, 
311 

but,  153,  225,  275,  283 

Case,  23,  26,  85,  147,  204 
denned,  87;  of  pronouns, 
88,  279;  of  relatives,  150, 
153;  case-shif tings,   244, 
272,  290 


367 


Index 


Chinese  language,  316 

Collective  nouns,  119,  359 

Colloquial  language,  254,  259, 
275,  279 

Comparison,  97 

Complements,  49,  50 

Composition,  4,  323 

Conjugation,  64,  158 

Old  and  New  Conjuga- 
tions, 160;  different 
vowel  types,  161;  mixed 
verbs,  162 

Conjunctions,  224 

classes,  225;  half -con- 
junctions, 227;  impor- 
tance of,  228 

Conjunctive  phrases,  227 

Construing,  343 

Contractions,  259,  297 

Copula,  34,  45,  68 

Copulative  verbs,  35,  49,  155, 
287 

Correlatives,  214,  227 

Dative  case,  53,  54,  86,  242, 

262,  263,  289 
Declension,  64,  87 
Defective  verbs,  156 
Degrees  of  comparison,  97 
Demonstratives,  139,  141 
Deponent  verbs,  104 
Diagrams,  an 
Dialect,  250  r,,  :;i ;; 

Disputed  points,  23,  245,  291- 
990 


do  and  did,  114,  165,  166 
"Don'ts"  for  writers,  355 
Double  genitives,  96,  136,  260 
Dual  number,  73 
Dutch  language,  132,  313 

each  and  every,  67,  139 

either,  298 

Ellipses,  276,  277 

else,  94,  283 

Emphatic  verb  phrases,  114, 
166 

English  grammar,  1 

present-day,  4;  history, 
5;  relations  to  foreign 
grammars,  26,  321 ; 
changes  in,  63,  166,  301 

English  language,  166,  314 
good  and   bad  English, 
251;     changes    in,    279, 
301-313;  importance, 317 

ess  as  feminine   termination, 
80 

Exclamatory    sentence,   235, 
236 

Expletives,  234,  263,  264 

Factitive  object  (or  objective 

predicate),  55,  102 
for,  222,  226 
French   language,    133,    150, 

251,  252,  257,  205,  273 
Future    tense    phrases,    114, 

172,  176,  318,  319 


Index 


369 


Gender,  78 

terminations,  80;  old 
forms,  81;  neuter,  82; 
common,  83;  lack  of 
gender  forms,  84 

Genitive  case,  91,  95 

German  language,   127,   133, 
166,  172,  250,  257,  309 

get,  282 

Gerund,  209,  210 

Good  usage,  251,  309 

Government,  66,  68 

Grammar 

educative  value,  3;  his- 
tory, 5;  divisions,  12; 
compared  with  logic,  20; 
general  grammar,  25; 
object  and  method,  28; 
relations  to  other  lan- 
guage studies,  321;  defi- 
nitions, 333;  place  in 
school  course,  329;  the 
teaching  of  grammar, 
332,  347 

Greek  language,  6,  114,  242, 
316 

had  and  have,  165,  166,  194, 

282 
had  rather,  would  rather,  etc., 

261,  270 

herewith,  therewith,  141 
his,  92 
Historical  present,  115 

7  and  me,  244,  265,  273,  274 


Idioms,  205,  256 

local  idioms,   259;  idio- 
matic   phrases,     260; 
"disposing   of"    idioms, 
261,  290 

if,  194 

Imperative  mood,   108,   109, 
110 

Imperfect  tenses,  113 

Impersonal    verbs    and   sen- 
tences, 262-266 

Independent  adverbs,  231 

Indirect  object,  53,  102,  263, 
289 

Infinitives,  155,  203 

tenses  of,  115;  sign,  204; 
"split  infinitive,"  205, 
292;  summary  of  forms, 
206;  uses,  207;  subject, 
241 

Infinitive  clauses,  241 

Inflection,  62,  140,  155 

loss    of    inflections,    63, 
306,  307 

ing,  verbals  in,  208 

Interjections,  38,  229 

classes,    232;  choice   of, 
234 

Intermediate    constructions, 
286 

Interrogatives,  146,  147,  186, 
188,  236 

Intransitive  phrases,  103,  169 

Inversion,  249,  250,  362 

it  and  its,  134,  135,  263,  265, 
280,  281 


370 


Index 


Language  lessons,  17, 19, 330, 

332 
Latin  language,  6,  8,  9,  10, 

54,  69,  129,  150,  233,  242, 

250,    288,    308,    309,    317, 

325,  326,  328,  340 
less  and  least,  98 
let,  162,  165,  173 
like,  284 

Limitations  of  grammar,  3 
Literature,  study  of,  3,  322, 

323 

"Middle  voice,"  104 
mine,  thine,  135 
Modal  adverbs,  214 
Modal  auxiliaries,  171 
Mood,  or  mode,  107 

varied  classifications, 
108;  "fact  forms"  and 
"thought  forms,1'  111 
more  and  most,  98,  99 

need,  dare,  etc.,  165 
Negatives,  216 
Neuter  gender,  82 
Neuter  verbs,  102 
Newspaper  English,  352 
Nominative    absolute,    242, 

243,  311 
Norman  -  French     language, 

161,  305,  306,  308 
Nouns,  34,  118,  334 

subject    and    predicate 

nouns,  58;  classes,  119; 

adjective  use  of  nouns, 

124 


Noun  relations,  120 

Number,  73 

rules  for  plurals,  74; 
false  plurals,  75;  agree- 
ment, 76,  153,  359 

Numerals,  143 

classes,  144;  position  of 
cardinals  and  ordinals, 
144;  numeral  phrases, 
145 

0  and  oh,  232 

Object,  50,  52 

indirect  object,  53;  fac- 
titive object,  55;  re- 
tained object,  55,  102 

Objective  constructions,  52 

Objective  predicate,  55 

of,  95 

Old  English,   129,   187,  208, 
242,  262,  305-308 

number,  73;  gender,  81; 
case,  86,  87,  90;  tense, 
115;  adjectives,  123;  ar- 
ticles, 127;  verbal  forms, 
163;  word  order,  247, 
250 

only,  216,  298 

Optative  mood,  196 

ought,  165,  173 

own,  137 


Parsing,  3,  15,  338,  342 
Participles,  155,  199 

tenses    of,    115;    forms, 

200;  uses,  201 


Index 


371 


Participial  infinitive,  206 

Participial  clauses,  241 

Particles,  40 

Parts  of  speech,  6,  33,  37 

historic  growth,  38-40; 
functional  basis,  41 

Passive  voice,  101 

subject,  102;  uses,  106 

Past  participle,  156,  200,  202 

Person,  70 

Personal  pronouns,  71,  130 
compound        pronouns, 
136;   antecedent,    137 

Personification,  83,  135 

Phrases,  239 

Possessive  case,  87,  90 

Possessive  pronouns,  135 

Possessive  sign,  88,  91 

Potential    forms,    109,    166, 
172 

auxiliaries,  171;  growth, 
196 

Predicate,  33 

parts,  34,  35;  types,  48 

Predicate  nouns,  58 

Prepositions,  219 

object,  52,  221;  com- 
pared with  conjunctions, 
220;  detached  preposi- 
tions, 221;  importance, 
223 

Principal  parts,  155 

Progressive  verb  phrases,  105 

Pronominal  adjectives,    138, 
140 


Pronouns,  121,  130,  138,  146, 
148 

person,  71;  compound 
pronouns,  136,  147;case- 
shiftings,  272 

Quaker  language,   132,   133, 
275 

Reflexives,  104,  137,  275,  319 

Relatives,  148 

origin,  149;  antecedent, 
148,  150,  153;  uses,  150, 
153 

Retained  object,  55,  102,  260 

Rules  of  syntax,  68 

Self,  136,  319 
Sentence,  33,  235 

2-part  and  3-part  theo- 
ries,   22;    classes,    235; 
types   of   assertive   sen- 
tences,  236;  impersonal 
sentences,    262;    length, 
312;  analysis,  337 
Simplified  spelling,  162 
Scotch  language,  307,  313 
Shall  and  will,  172,  176 

summary  of  uses,  178; 
history,  179;  compare 
with  other  languages, 
180;  "shall  of  prophecy," 
184;  modern  explana- 
tions of  use,  185;  use 
in  questions,  187;  diffi- 
culties of  foreigners,  190 


Index 


Should  and  would,  174,  187, 

188 

Sign  of  infinitive,  204,  205 
Slang,  259 
So,  284 
"Split  infinitives,"  205,  217, 

292 
Strong  and  weak  verbs,  159, 

161,  310 

Subject  and  predicate,  33,  34 

Subjunctive  mood,  108,  192 

conjunctions,   193;  uses, 

194,    195;  loss  of,    197; 

value,  198 

Subordinate       conjunctions, 

225 
Syntax,  12 

rules,  68;  idioms  of  syn- 
tax, 260 

Tense,  112 

perfect  and  imperfect 
tenses,  113;  tenses  of 
different  moods,  115; 
tense  attractions,  116 

than,  153,  276,  277,  284 

that,  141,  149,  150,  226,  260 

"that  o/f"  142 

this  and  that,  67,  141 

the,  127,  283 

thee  and  thou,  132,  274,  275 

there,  264 

to,  165,  204,  284,  293 


Transitive    and    intransitive 

verbs,  50,  102 
Translation  English,  257,  258 

Verbals,  155,  203,  208,  209, 

211 

Verb  complements,  48,  50 
Verb  phrases,  167 

classified,  168;  irregular 

phrases,    169;    analysis, 

169 
Verbs,  34,  43,  45 

principal     parts,      154; 

classes,  1 55 ;  mixed  verbs, 

161;  old  forms,  163 
Vocatives,  233 
Voice,  101 

subject  of  passive,  102; 

use  of  passive  forms,  106 

we,  132,  266 

were  and  wert,  193 

what,  139,  146,  149,  282 

whether,  146 

wherein,  whereunto,  228 

which,  139,  146 

who,  146,  147,  149,  152 

whoever,  whichever,  151,  152 

whose,  95,  151 

Word  order,  246,  250,  305 
compared     with     other 
languages,    250;    inver- 
sion, 249,  250 


Index 


373 


Writers  on  Grammar  Quoted 


Abbott,  28,  148,  262 
Alford,  Dean,  229,  272,  273, 

296 

Allen,  5,  97,  256,  314 
Author,   The  (London),   192 
Bain,  37,  43,  63,  66,  73,  90, 

101,  209,  224,  333 
Bacon,  146 
Baker,  292 

Barbour,  18,  20,  246,  337 
Bates,   Arlo,    112,    130,    148, 

199,  208,  219,  224 
Beecher,  Henry  Ward,  272 
Bigelow,  Marshall  T,  272,  351 
Bingham,  14 
Blackburn,  176,  183 
Boswell's  "Life  of  Johnson/' 

286 

Boyden,  32,  37,  347 
Brown  and  DeGarmo,    107, 

138,  172,  239,  329 
Brown,  Goold,   1,  5,  25,  88, 

251,  296,  329,  333 
Buehler,  32,  48,  321,  331 
Buttman,  256 
Carpenter,  37,  224,  235,  239, 

272,  292,  314 
Carpenter,  Baker,  and  Scott, 

13,  329 
Chaucer,  296 
Chubb,  1 
Cobbett,    48,    112,   118,    138, 

154,  219,  280 
Coleridge,  228 


Connecticut  Board  of  Edu- 
cation, 18 
Cowper,  229 
Curtius,  52 
Dale,  13 
Davenport  and  Emerson,  25, 

37,  58,  85,   118,   138,   172, 

229,  246,  280 
De  Vere,  M.  Schele,    43,    78, 

126,    130,    143,    167,    176, 

213,  219 
Dickens,  337 
Dry  den,  154 
Earle,  25,  37,  122,  192 
Emerson,  126 
Everett,  C.  C.,  20,  52 
Fitch,  28,  118 
Garfield,  President,  338 
Green,  239,  337 
Hall,  148,  302 
Harper  and  Burgess,  37,  43, 

78,  107,  199,  203,  246,  247, 

343 

Hare,  Archbishop,  186 
Head,  Sir  E.  W.,  191 
Harris,  W.  T.,  2,  8,  333 
Helps,  Sir  Arthur,  235 
Hermann,  43 

Higginson,  T.  W.,  351,  352 
Independent,     The,  (N.     Y.), 

66,  251,  301,  302 
James,  224 
Jamieson,  177 


374 


Index 


Jespcrson,  78,  90,  246,  267, 
272,  301,  314 

Johnson,  Dr.,  13,  269 

Johnson,  R.,  286 

Joynes,  20,  70,  79,  138,  164, 
171,  203,  219,  256,  286, 
292,  315,  321,  329,  333, 
335,  337,  347 

Kellner,  247,  301 

King  Henry  VIII.  (Gram- 
mar of),  13 

King  Solomon,  123 

Kittredge  and  Arnold,  158, 
159,  343,  352 

Krauter,  158 

Latham,  274 

Laurie,  20 

Lewis,  13,  28,  43,  63,  66,  235, 
329,  337 

Locke,  224 

Lockwood,  321 

Lounsbury,  66,  159,  209,  267, 
271,  292,  295,  203. 

Low,  314 

Lowth,  91,  270 

Madvig,  52 

Matzner,  177 

Manley  and  Hailman,  122 

Manning,  96 

Marcel,  329 

Marsh,  70 

Martin,  326 

Mason,  85 

Matthews,  Brander,  256,  262, 
301 

Mead,  32 


Meiklejohn,  37 

Mill,  John  Stuart,  20,  22 

More,  Sir  Thomas,  315 

Morris,  130 

MUller,  Max,  20,  229 

Mttller,  Otfried,  62 

Murray,  39,  67 

Nesbitt,  122 

Old  Grammar,  126,  176 

Oliphant,  King  ton,  213 

Palmer,  G.  H.,  351 

Pegge,  256 

Peile,  78 

Ramsey,   28,    101,    107,   182, 

208 

Ruskin,  123 
Sayce,  158 
Schleicher,  62,  314 
Schmidt,  278 
School  Journal,   The  (N.  Y.) 

171 

Seneca,  5 
Shaftesbury,  224 
Shakespeare,  229,  321 
Shuman,  351 
Sidney,  Sir  Philip,  315 
Snoddy,  37,  337 
Southworth,    32,    176,    192, 

301,  302,  315,  343 
Sou  they,  164 
Steele,  11,  73,  148 
Stewart,  154 
Strong,        Logeman,        and 

Wheeler,   32,  78,  107,  112 
Sweet,  66,  164,  192,  219,  221, 

241,  246,  251,  272,  286,  3C1 


OVERDUE. 


AND     TO     Sl.o        ON     T 

3N    THE 


SEVENTH    DAY 


OCT    14  194S 


YB  0171 


* 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


